Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-camel-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-camel-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3117B85EB for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 14:28:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 31729 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2011 14:28:12 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-camel-dev-archive@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 31687 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2011 14:28:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for dev@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 31036 invoked by uid 99); 1 Sep 2011 14:25:53 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_NEUTRAL,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 07:25:26 -0700 (PDT) From: tmi To: dev@camel.apache.org Message-ID: <1314887126978-4758522.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - JmsConsumer support for asynchronous routing engine - Higher scalability MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit With regards to performance improvements when using async engine, I am wondering if you get comparable performance by using concurrentConsumers on the camel-jms endpoint. However I can see the benefit of not using multiple threads for fast routing. -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-JmsConsumer-support-for-asynchronous-routing-engine-Higher-scalability-tp4681859p4758522.html Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.