camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Björn Bength <bjorn.ben...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Activemq for high performance and scalable use.
Date Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:43:10 GMT
Hi Omar
It depends on in what time-span you expect those 250000 requests, and
what latency you can tolerate.
If all your requests are spread over 24 hours, you have no worries at
all. You can choose whatever.
When you you start getting 250000 per hour, you can start thinking
about moving your app from your laptop to a dedicated server or
upgrade to a an SSD disk.
If you need lower latency choose kahadb and maybe a couple of extra producers.
Good luck



On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Omar Atia <omar.atia@its.ws> wrote:
> I'm using it in camel-context :).
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Claus Ibsen [claus.ibsen@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 12:29 PM
> To: users@camel.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Activemq for high performance and scalable use.
>
> Hi
>
> This is the mailing list for Apache Camel.
> Can you please use the mailing list for Apache ActiveMQ for your AMQ questions.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Omar Atia <omar.atia@its.ws> wrote:
>> Dear Ashwin ,
>>
>> The XML message size is less than 2000 bytes , we have already four channels to send
messages in parallel to mina-tcp then to activemq channel.
>>
>> Can you help with default configurations?
>>
>> from the below http://activemq.apache.org/kahadb.html , In messages for sure and
asynch.
>>
>> can we configure threads for activemq ? increase no of threads to handle 200000 request?
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Omar Atia
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Ashwin Karpe [akarpe@fusesource.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 2:28 AM
>> To: users@camel.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Activemq for high performance and scalable use.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Using a relational store is definitely slower than KahaDB. KahaDB is a store
>> that employs indexing & has a high speed journal to deal with efficient
>> access to stored messages. The relational layer is more expensive due to the
>> cost of SQL lookups & persistence...
>>
>> However your requirement (250000 msgs daily, msg size ?), just based on
>> number of messages does not seem out of the ordinary using either option
>> (unless there is something about msg size that I do not see). KahaDB is
>> easily the better and faster approach...
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Ashwin...
>>
>> -----
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> Ashwin Karpe
>> Apache Camel Committer & Sr Principal Consultant
>> FUSESource (a Progress Software Corporation subsidiary)
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>> Blog: http://opensourceknowledge.blogspot.com
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Activemq-for-high-performance-and-scalable-use-tp5541877p5542771.html
>> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
> --
> Claus Ibsen
> -----------------
> FuseSource
> Email: cibsen@fusesource.com
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/

Mime
View raw message