Re: Transacted session commit is slow

s: 1. Why performance difference is so huge between SESSION_TRANSACTED and CLIENT_ACKNOWLEDGE modes? 2. What I'm i loosing (gaining) using CLIENT_ACKNOWLEDGE instead of SESSION_TRANSACTED? Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas On 9/5/07, Dziugas Baltrunas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > &g

Re: Transacted session commit is slow

suppose this is already disk bound, but strange is that performance degrades about 100 times comparing to transactional non-persistent messaging. Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas On 9/5/07, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah my mistake - that only works on the client side - not on the br

Re: Transacted session commit is slow

(transport, format, options); } } Don't forget to put your class in ActiveMQ classpath. One way is to pack YourTcpTransportFactory into jar and put in ActiveMQ lib/ folder. Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas On 9/4/07, Dziugas Baltrunas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > &g

Re: Transacted session commit is slow

Hi, what is the right way to turn off TCP_NODELAY on Apache ActiveMQ 4.1.1 (server side)? Looks like none of the options (socket.tcpNoDelay, wireFormat.tcpNoDelayEnabled, tcpNoDelay) work as described in AMQ-1156. Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas On 9/4/07, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Transacted session commit is slow

running on Windows but slow if ActiveMQ runs on Linux. So it appears that my problem is the same as described AMQ-1137. Any hints how to "tune" ActiveMQ running on Linux to speed up commit operations? Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas On 9/4/07, Dziugas Baltrunas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Transacted session commit is slow

Hello, thanks for reply. As I wrote, it does not matter whether I'm consuming persistent or non-persistent messages. ActiveMQ is running on Linux local drive with ext3 file system and in all other ways performance is good, up to several thousand messages per second. Regards, Dziugas Balt

Transacted session commit is slow

s the same - only about 10 msg / sec. 99% of time takes the Session.commit() operation. There is similar issue AMQ-1137, however, I have same performance both on Windows and Linux platforms, so IMHO this has no deal with tcpNoDelay or any other flags. Is it expected to be like this? Regard

Re: When QueueView.purge() does not actually purge?

Why JMX QueueView.purge() method does not actually purge queue (for those messages appeared due to activemq-cpp crash)? Thanks. Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas On 8/6/07, Dziugas Baltrunas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm using Apache ActiveMQ 4.1.1 with the default confi

When QueueView.purge() does not actually purge?

messages having both PERSISTENT and NON_PERSISTENT delivery modes. I'm wondering to know in which circumstances purge() might not actually purge the queue and why ActiveMQ process restart does not flush the data for NON_PERSISTENT messages? Thanks in advance. Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas

Re: Message persistence

no calls to getJMSDeliveryMode() on the message object. Is it expected to be like this or is it most obviously a bug to ignore mandatory JMSDeliveryMode header property? Regards, Dziugas Baltrunas On 8/6/07, Dziugas Baltrunas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I want m

Message persistence

Hello, I want messages send by producer to the queue to be non persistent. For this, I'm setting JMSDeliveryMode to DeliveryMode.NON_PERSISTENT. However, this still makes the message persistent as seen via JMX. Only calling setDeliveryMode(DeliveryMode.NON_PERSISTENT) makes the message to be non p