qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <Amit_Grov...@Dell.com>
Subject RE: QPID AMQP Performance test
Date Wed, 02 Oct 2013 17:11:13 GMT
Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
Thanks Everyone for quick response..
I am trying the suggestion I got so far from everyone, will send my finding to the group to
get the feedback..

-----Original Message-----
From: NimbusParc [mailto:nimbusparc@yahoo.in]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 3:41 AM
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: QPID AMQP Performance test

Gordon Sim wrote
> On 10/01/2013 06:47 AM, NimbusParc wrote:
>> Which version of QPID you are using while testing ?
>> In the recent version of QPID-0.24, the --tcp-nodelay became Yes by
>> default.
>>   If you are using previous versions, you need to pass this argument
>> to get better performance.
> Just for clarification, I suspect (given the executable names) that
> the question was referring to proton messenger which is on its own
> release cycle (0.5 being the latest) and where there is no tcp-nodelay option.

Oh.. When answering to this question, i am just doing the same performance test for my C++
At that time by seeing this question, i  know this is about proton messenger but i don't know
why i answered for the C++ broker. It was totally due to my deep involvement  in testing the
C++ broker.

 Excuse me and What you answered above is very good with clear explanation.

Gordon Sim wrote
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:

> users-unsubscribe@.apache

> For additional commands, e-mail:

> users-help@.apache

View this message in context: http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/QPID-AMQP-Performance-test-tp7598833p7598855.html
Sent from the Apache Qpid users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message