Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 09:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Daniel <danielbaniel@gmail.com>
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Message-ID: <1500999642208-4728882.post@n4.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPVVMa_fqiPA0FrGGp4sXfzf7KOsq_uqS0Z2Kxyd0+ZzX9qfVQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1500407998854-4728648.post@n4.nabble.com> <CAPVVMa_fqiPA0FrGGp4sXfzf7KOsq_uqS0Z2Kxyd0+ZzX9qfVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Performance. Single producer and consumer is slow - 2 producers
 and 2 consumers is fast.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thanks for the responses Tim. I was getting emails to my spam so I didn't see
them.

After some digging it appears I know the reason for the different
performance we see.

ActiveMQ has a threadpool of 1 thread persisting messages received to a
queue to disk. In the situation where we have multiple producers and
multiple consumers ActiveMQ will deliver messages which are still queued to
consumers. This means that with multiple producers and consumers we see
higher performance because we skip the disk write.

With 1 producer only one message is ever sent at a time and so the
threadpool of 1 is never full and receives never get messages directly from
the queue before they are persisted to disk.

Does this assessment make sense to you?


--
View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Performance-Single-producer-and-consumer-is-slow-2-producers-and-2-consumers-is-fast-tp4728648p4728882.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.