Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45B31100DC for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 19:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 90655 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 2015 19:04:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 90608 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 2015 19:04:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 90585 invoked by uid 99); 2 Mar 2015 19:04:30 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 19:04:30 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.1 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_REMOTE_IMAGE X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of burtonator2011@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.170] (HELO mail-ob0-f170.google.com) (209.85.214.170) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 19:04:26 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f170.google.com with SMTP id va2so33321371obc.1 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:04:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=omfuG+LHh/b1FSYcOdpGWew/cTnOVuzM3CpKWG/70rQ=; b=XLxce9h+rndIl1NFQLAHl5QqNXcpLF3zjHN+HgOJTUXcwXJYK4fTNNZVijkMJhzLL6 O6LoXzX4MJBPMwEl2Morqe7R3GihHJZWUTB7YNFiz5Hj8t1BwAnhWJqyoGgGwwGrF/EZ pt/lLFsXdZWUhYBLPQv/OtcTNXr1clsR3Ku72/vAogF8jaYvY5P5wwRy6LRKrv5q95hh pxxzZN2EQoU8fp7Ri2+qcG1WnBZLwdc07+Kij9tdr0HcWy50cRyLEuKPX88uEv75gff4 Xyrw97gn49uWlcQOGFUCy1Eakk7+ZBS0kahw3zh6gKeJCmOtPBTlCSydIxj+Tpv2Z/Bn +irg== X-Received: by 10.182.97.134 with SMTP id ea6mr15775870obb.21.1425323046199; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:04:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: burtonator2011@gmail.com Received: by 10.183.6.227 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 11:03:46 -0800 (PST) From: Kevin Burton Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 11:03:46 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: jhlfGsTyv8iXBvI0Ybvmt0CwiQI Message-ID: Subject: Is JMX slow or just the ActiveMQ API calls? To: users@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e4eeadbe6a0051052e1eb X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b2e4eeadbe6a0051052e1eb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It looks like all of my JMX calls take about 200ms (give or take). This is pretty fast unless you have to make a ton of calls. I suspect this is just JMX overhead creating proxy objects, calling the methods, etc Has anyone proposed an alternative to JMX for a API for communicating with ActiveMQ? Right now doing things like enumerating queues, connections, etc is rather slow at large numbers. JSON+REST would be pretty awesome. Kevin --=20 Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com Location: *San Francisco, CA* blog: http://burtonator.wordpress.com =E2=80=A6 or check out my Google+ profile --047d7b2e4eeadbe6a0051052e1eb--