Try it out. And check the source. The source is your friend. We are an
open source community, and happy to be so.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:52 AM, xabhi wrote:
> Please respond
>
> -
> Abhi
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Slow-KahaDB-access-
Please respond
-
Abhi
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Slow-KahaDB-access-tp4677915p4678345.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Can anybody answer the queries posted in previous post.
-
Abhi
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Slow-KahaDB-access-tp4677915p4678236.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
I have few more queries:
1. IIUC, If there is only one producer sending persistent messages, then
journal writes will happen for every message and Slow KahaDB access logging
will be done for every message.
2. In what cases does "Slow KahaDB access: Journal read took " will logged?
In which ca
the journal will batch writes, but does not delay, so under parallel
load (multiple connections), there will be batching. Batch writes can
accumulate while a write to disk and sync is in progress.
On 17 February 2014 07:01, xabhi wrote:
> Hi,
> I have read that page and I could only find that the
Hi,
I have read that page and I could only find that the logging will be done
after cleanup or checkpoint interval.
But its not clear what happens when a persistent message arrives at broker.
Does journal write happens as soon as a persistent message arrives(i.e.
separately for every persistent mes
http://activemq.apache.org/kahadb.html
On Feb 14, 2014, at 10:19 AM, xabhi wrote:
> Can somebody from activemq dev answer these queries please?
>
> Thanks,
> Abhi
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Slow-KahaDB-access-tp4677915p4677981.html
> S
Can somebody from activemq dev answer these queries please?
Thanks,
Abhi
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Slow-KahaDB-access-tp4677915p4677981.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
If your message volume is such that all message reference can reside in
memory and your consumers can keep up with your producers then there is no
need for persistence. If you want to be able to spool/cursor message
references to disk when memory is exhausted, then persistence is necessary.
2009/1
Thanks for the clarification.
Then my next question is what is the advantage to having persistence turned
on for a broker in activemq if none of the topics or queues are durable and
the producers of messages are not asking for delivery persistence and all
the messages are asynchronous.
--
View t
The problem is that they cannot be interpreted by the end user and even if
they could here is no clear corresponding lever to tweak at this time. It
makes sense to leave them in but with a default threshold of 0, such that
they must be enabled, by a knowledgeable user, with a limit that makes sense
>Are you noticing delays in producers or consumers or just a little worried
>about the INFO message?
My main concern was about the message. I haven't seen any delays.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Slow-KahaDB-access-tp26594249p26617441.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - U
Gary Tully wrote:
> Those log messages are developer debug aids that were added early on in the
> dev cycle and possibly should now be removed.
If those messages can be interpreted by end user why not leave them in? Right
now I agree that they might be of little use, because we haven't got any
Those log messages are developer debug aids that were added early on in the
dev cycle and possibly should now be removed.
In addition, this one is a little misleading as the cleanup duration is
including the wait time to get exclusive access to the index, and not just
the index cleanup operation du
Hi,
FWIW, I just documented how to configure the threshold on which the message
will be logged
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/KahaDB#KahaDB-SlowKahaDBaccesslogmessages
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb
Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/
Active
Matthew Hixson wrote:
> I see these messages: "Slow KahaDB access: cleanup took 1998"
I've also seen those messages. It is nice to get a hint about
possible performance issues. Now it be even better if someone could
offer a ballpark figure when to worry, and what to do about it.
--
Fredrik Jon
16 matches
Mail list logo
