On 6/9/2011 6:37 AM, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 06/08/2011 04:11 PM, Anthony Foglia wrote:
>> On 06/08/2011 09:00 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>>> async transfer is the largest impact, not acknowledgement.
>>
>> How do I do that? I'm already setting the capacity of the receiver to
>> 1000, which we found was the best for the Python code.
> 
> I believe the issue is in the way you are doing this for the swigged 
> client. At present you need to use the setCapacity() method to set the 
> capacity rather than setting it as an attribute.
> 
> With that change in place I see the rcv_rate for the swig api jump from 
> ~1,300 to ~19,000 for 20,000 msgs.

Thanks.  I'm seeing the same changes.  I need to change my producer to use the SWIG interface, but now that I can see the speed up in the consumer, I'd expect similar performance in the producer.

> I would also echo Ted's comments, that the messaging API is really what 
> we recommend, and that the swigged version when completed would be a 
> drop in replacement for that (avoiding annoyances like the above).

I agree that it should be a drop-in replacement, and I'm willing to help make the necessary changes, but I don't see where.  In the 0.10 release, there's the python package, qpidc-0.10/bindings/qpid/python/cqpid.py, that would need to be patched, but I don't see that in the repository.  Where would the changes need to go?


> [Just for clarity: synchronous acknowledgement per message would have a 
> pretty similar effect to synchronous transfer (round trip forced 
> per-message). Obviously if the acknowledgements are batched then the 
> roundtrip is less frequent and therefore has less impact].


-- 
Anthony Foglia
Princeton Consultants
(609) 987-8787 x233


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