qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carl Trieloff <cctriel...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: QPID C++ benchs : localhost vs remote benches
Date Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:35:25 GMT
Gordon Sim wrote:
> ffrenchm wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> first of all I would like to thanks everybody who help me to achieve my
>> benches with QPID C++.
>>
>> I almost finished them and I plan to put in this mailing list my benches
>> results (QPID C++ vs ActiveMQ done with JMS API) during the WE.
>>
>> Anyway I've another question for you :) There is a point in the QPIDC++
>> which I think is strange. You have to know first that I've to kind of
>> benches : local benches where client and server are in the same 
>> machine and
>> remote benches where client is on machine A and server is on machine 
>> B. I'm
>> always using a TCP connection. The point I think is strange is the 
>> BIG gap
>> between local and remote benches on QPID C++ I have (with ActiveMQ I 
>> have a
>> gap to but it's not so big)... For example when sending 100000 1024 
>> bytes
>> messages (non persistent) I've these results :
>>
>> QPID C++                  --------------
>> local send : 19328,39 msg/s
>> remote send : 5677.26 msg/s
>>
>> local receive : 19867,55 msg/s
>> remote receive : 5637.17 msg/s
>>
>> ActiveMQ
>> ------------
>> local send :  12359,55 msg/s
>> remote send : 7916.83 msg/s
>>
>> local receive : 12359,55 msg/s
>> remote receive : 7962.68 msg/s
>>
>> As you can see my results are better with ActiveMQ when I use remote 
>> client
>> than with QPID C++ and that's why I think it's strange because for my 
>> local
>> benches QPID C++ is really the best !
>>
>> Do you already notice this kind of big differences ?  Do you have any 
>> ideas
>> from where is coming the slowing down  for this kind of remote use ? 
>> Did I
>> miss some tune parameters or is this an issue we should work on QPID 
>> C++ ?
>
> I came across one issue with nvidia ethernet cards that had similar 
> symptoms (may not be the same as this of course). The dmesg output 
> contained: "eth0: too many iterations (6) in nv_nic_irq." or similar.
>
> Do the numbers change if you use much smaller messages?

The numbers seem low. for example I just did a comparison run on my 
notebook for on trunk

1k messages with C++, localhost ~90 k/second
Java low level API is about 51k msg/second
As the JMS should be in the 40k/sec + on single connection non-server. 
any additional info you have that might point to something?

Carl.





---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:users-subscribe@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message