activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Bish <>
Subject Re: Some positive feedback about mkahadb
Date Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:41:02 GMT
On 06/17/2016 06:16 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Just wanted to share some positive feedback we got from a customer.
> I wrote some time go about a problem we had at a customer that 
> activemq failover took too long.
> In the end the problem was the sheer amount of data in the kahadb 
> journals.
> We found that most of the long term queued data was in some DLQs. In a 
> single kahadb this DLQ contents were very scarcely scattered in the 
> kahadb journals.
> So most journals just contained some kb of still active messages but 
> still consumed the whole space.
> This lead to a kahadb size of about 34GB. We then decided to switch to 
> mkahadb with one kahadb per queue. As now the DLQs were isolated the 
> messages were packaed much more densely.
> After migrating the production we got feedback from the customer that 
> the kahadb size went down to just about 50MB.  This of course also 
> removed the big failover times.
> So I can very much recommend to use mkahadb for such scenarios.
> Christian
Great, thanks for the feedback

Tim Bish
twitter: @tabish121

View raw message