That sounds more like it! 400 msgs/sec seemed awefully low to me. Glad to help!
On 5/22/07, Pravin Kundal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Sir, Actually our producer was running on a very slower machine...so thats why we got very bad results. But your advices really helped us. Stomp is the fastest and for queue we are getting results upto 1500 msges/sec :)...more than sufficient for us. Thanking you for your help !! Mittler, Nathan wrote: > > Sorry ... The url should be "tcp://localhost:61613?wireFormat=stomp" > > See http://activemq.apache.org/cms/configuring.html > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Pravin Kundal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 12:34 PM >> To: users@activemq.apache.org >> Subject: RE: Implementation of multithreading model on CMS ActiveMQ >> >> >> I am trying to test it out using stomp. >> But it is giving me exceptions >> On Consumer Client: ActiveMQConnectionFactory - unknown >> Transport Factory. >> >> I tried with following brokerURI's >> >> std::string brokerURI = "stomp://localhost:61613" >> "?wireFormat=stomp" >> "&transport.useAsyncSend=true"; >> >> std::string brokerURI = "stomp://localhost:61613" >> >> std::string brokerURI = "stomp://localhost:61616" >> >> can you please help us out? >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> >> Mittler, Nathan wrote: >> > >> > >> >> >> >> In the case I will need to implement the concurrency >> control over the >> >> session, so that only one thread can use the session, as >> sessions are >> >> implemented for serial use? Rght? >> > >> > Yes, you should add your own concurrency control for the session. >> > >> >> >> >> I tried the first case in which i implemented the multithreading, >> >> each thread running its own session and each session having one >> >> producer. But the results were not even close to our requriment >> >> (result in msges/sec). >> >> >> > >> > Were you using openwire or stomp as the protocol? We have >> seen cases >> > where small messages with openwire cause extra delay due to >> the naggle >> > algorithm and that message footprints are smaller than their stomp >> > counterpart. If you're using openwire, I suggest you >> switch over to >> > stomp and see if you have different results. If that does >> the trick, >> > our next release will allow a user-specified TCP-NODELAY >> socket option >> > that should fix the problem for openwire (for small messages). >> > >> >> Do you think the other case can give us the better results >> (i.e. "The >> >> ActiveMQ-CPP implementation, however, will allow you to share a >> >> session across threads.") >> >> >> > >> > Without understanding your particular usage of the client, I would >> > guess that a different usage wouldn't help much. Just to >> make sure, >> > however, you could slightly modify our example application >> > >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/activemq-cpp/trunk/src/examp >> > le s/main.cpp and see if you can get it to meet your requirements. >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > Nate >> > >> > >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Implementation-of-multithreading-model-o >> n-CMS-ActiveMQ-tf3790047s2354.html#a10722340 >> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Implementation-of-multithreading-model-on-CMS-ActiveMQ-tf3790047s2354.html#a10743030 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
