Hi,
Yes, I use ASYNCIO and libAIO.
I have seen performance is better than NIO.
You think I can achieve the same performance with NIO?
Do you think I can disable netty direct memory?
-Franck.
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 8:05 AM Justin Bertram wrote:
> It's really impossible to say whether or not th
It's really impossible to say whether or not this is some kind of memory
leak which might be fixed in a later release. However, I do know that
2.14.0 was released over 4 years ago now and there's been almost 3,000
commits between then and 2.39.0 (i.e. the current release).
Regarding the specifics
Ahh regarding testing -> I built a little Java microservice that simulated
my specific messages and size distribution while also ensuring realistic
amounts of uniqueness and load on specific queues and topics.
Else the tests simply aren’t realistic enough to find and reproduce
problems or be certa
Yes but I’d want to make sure it reproduces the issues we’ve seen. And due
to the nature of the messages it takes time to make data that is fully
anonymous and still realistic
On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 at 21:06, Justin Bertram wrote:
> On the other thread you mentioned a "little Java microservice that
No, sorry to be unclear on this.
We never got long term high performance runs with Artemis.
We tried for about 1 year.
It’s fine when we only have low traffic but even then seemed to grow
sluggish requiring us to start with weekly restarts.
It was simply unstable as soon as we got a large amount of
On the other thread you mentioned a "little Java microservice that
simulated my specific messages and size distribution...and load on specific
queues and topics." Is that something you could provide (e.g. on GitHub)?
Justin
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 2:02 PM Christian Kurmann wrote:
> I will see
Could you provide some form of the test-case you were running so I could
investigate further?
Justin
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 1:56 PM Christian Kurmann wrote:
> No, sorry to be unclear on this.
> We never got long term high performance runs with Artemis.
> We tried for about 1 year.
> It’s fine
I will see what I can do. As mentioned I processed millions of real
financial messages. This will take a while.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 at 20:59, Justin Bertram wrote:
> Could you provide some form of the test-case you were running so I could
> investigate further?
>
>
> Justin
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2
To be clear, everything worked in Artemis 2.30.0 and then began failing
after an upgrade?
Justin
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 1:40 PM Christian Kurmann wrote:
> Hi Justin.
> Yes, and I’m sorry it didn't work out for us.
> The problem was a combination of using operators on openshift which among
> o
Hi Justin.
Yes, and I’m sorry it didn't work out for us.
The problem was a combination of using operators on openshift which among
other things make it difficult to change settings due to the internal
translation of attributes to actual config values in the running pods, and
the issues I alluded to
I have run the same tests with slight variations of messages on AMD and on
INTEL based systems with different clock speeds but all => 3,5GHz
To be honest this used to be a much bigger issue a few years ago but with
modern servers its less important (however I did make sure we for fast
performance c
I saw your email on the "Are there any hardware recommendations for
ActiveMQ Classic?" about performance issue you observed with Artemis. Is
this the issue you were referring to? If so, did you try the configuration
change I mentioned? Any follow-up you could provide here would be valuable.
Justi
Christian,
Really good information. What was the clock speed on your cores? What was
your CEPH running on? SSD?
What did you use to performance test? I found a Maven plugin and JMeter
scripts.
Regards,
William Crowell
From: Christian Kurmann
Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 1:55 PM
I would say in the next week or so. We've got a few more commits to get it
first.
In the meantime you could use a snapshot build, assuming you're using Maven
dependencies. Snapshots are regularly published here [1]. We try to ensure
that every commit is solid so stability shouldn't be much of an i
I run approximately 15 million messages per day on 8 cores with 16GB memory
using ActiveMQ classic.
I unfortunately have peaks and while most messages are 1kb I have some that
are >2mb.
I have done lots of performance testing to manage this and found that
Artemis unfortunately was not usable for m
I agree with François 40M messages a day is a drop in the bucket for a modern
server to handle running ActiveMQ Classic.
> On Feb 19, 2025, at 12:27 PM, Francois Papon wrote:
>
> Hi William,
>
> From my side, I have customers that are using ActiveMQ Classic for heavy
> workload and with the r
Hi William,
From my side, I have customers that are using ActiveMQ Classic for
heavy workload and with the right tuning and hardware setting it works
very well so I cannot see why you should migrate to Artemis to make it work.
regards,
François
Le 19/02/2025 à 17:49, William Crowell a écrit
Justin and Matt,
That’s kind of what I thought. I just wanted to see if there were any current
benchmarks for Classic. I think there were at one-point years ago, but they
are so old.
The goal right now to is produce and consume up to 40 million messages a day.
Each message would be 400-1000
Justin,
I have not tried that. I am trying to push management to use Artemis instead
of Classic because I think Artemis will perform better for their heavy workload.
Regards,
William Crowell
From: Justin Bertram
Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 11:48 AM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Su
Matt,
Thank you and that is very valuable information.
Regards,
William Crowell
From: Matt Pavlovich
Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 11:31 AM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: Are there any hardware recommendations for ActiveMQ Classic?
Hi William—
Keep in mind that ActiveMQ C
Have you tried using your OpenWire client with Artemis? If so, what did you
find?
Justin
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:05 AM William Crowell
wrote:
> Justin,
>
> It would be OpenWire.
>
> Regards,
>
> William Crowell
>
> From: Justin Bertram
> Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 10:56 AM
> To:
There are no plans to drop OpenWire support from Artemis here at Apache. I
expect Artemis will support any changes to OpenWire for the foreseeable
future.
As I see it, what happens in other Artemis distributions is immaterial to
what happens here at Apache.
Justin
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:31
Hi William—
Keep in mind that ActiveMQ Classic will continue to advance OpenWire versions
for new features and capabilities. The current roadmap includes plans to finish
out JMS 2.0 support, etc. Artemis will always need to consume those changes,
and some Artemis distributions are dropping supp
Justin,
It would be OpenWire.
Regards,
William Crowell
From: Justin Bertram
Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 10:56 AM
To: users@activemq.apache.org
Subject: Re: Are there any hardware recommendations for ActiveMQ Classic?
Which "Classic library" are you referring to? Artemis supports the
Which "Classic library" are you referring to? Artemis supports the OpenWire
protocol used by the JMS client implementation shipped with Classic.
In many cases you can simply point existing OpenWire clients from Classic
to Artemis and everything will "just work."
Justin
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 9
I agree with Matt 100%.
Aside from wide variation in the workloads there is also wide variation in
performance goals. Some folks don't mind a heavy workload with relatively
high latency. Some folks want the heaviest possible workload with the
lowest possible latency.
My recommendation would be to
Hi William-
This is a mission impossible question. The hardware required to address
different workloads can vary wildly. For example — thousands of connections
handling a few million messages per day vs a hundred connections handling 1B
messages per day.
ActiveMQ can be embedded down to run o
Hi, all
I have a case with an Artemis ActiveMq cluster which process a very large
number of messages per second.
Each few weeks of operation, JVM memory is still cleaning properly but
native memory is not getting cleared.
Did anyone encounter this case?
Does it sounds more like a configuration i
Hi,
Are there any hardware recommendations (not minimum requirements) for ActiveMQ
Classic? I am trying to determine what CPU, RAM, and SSD type I will need when
sizing out a production environment. Are there any recent benchmark tests for
a particular hardware setup? What I will probably ne
Hi,
Yes, broker mirroring sounds like a suitable solution to the use case you have
described, perhaps in particular "Dual Mirror" described here:
https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/amqp-broker-connections.html#dual-mirror-disaster-recovery
Personally I'd recomm
30 matches
Mail list logo
