On 5/29/07, Ames, Andreas (Andreas) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
I'm in the process of evaluating ActiveMQ in a callcenter setting.
I'm unable to find figures about its scalability.
In my scenario I'll have a typical middletier server 'connected'
to a diversity of frontend clients via ActiveMQ. That will mean
about 6000 pub/sub-channels for event delivery with at most two or
three producers and a varying number of consumers. Unfortunately
I'll also have to provide some request/response-support. I've
read the recommendation to use temporary queues to deliver the
responses. As I might need to support (in the worst case) up to
500 clients, I'm concerned about scalability (500 queues
additionally).
The number of destinations doesn't really matter; its really just a
RAM overhead in the broker; a small amount of RAM is used for each
destination.
Whats more relevant is how many connections the broker has to maintain
(as a socket & thread is usually used per connection) and some OSes
have a limit of the maximum sockets/threads per process (which you can
often increase). e.g. on a small linux box I've tested 2000
connections on a single broker which works fine.
Also message throughput is something to consider; but usually a single
broker can deal with most common loading requirements
I'm only talking about non-persistent messages for the moment.
I'm not yet decided about duplicate acks at the moment, I'll need to
read a bit more and do some experimentation.
I'm expecting a maximum of about 12-15 messages per second at the
moment.
Thats pretty low; so a single oldish PC should do the trick for the broker
I'm currently planning for a single (TCP-) connection per client
(=> max. 500).
So out of your experience, would you say that a single broker can
'easily' stand this load or should I I plan with a broker network
right from the beginning?
I'd say a single broker could easily handle double those numbers of
connections and 10x the message throughputs - on a cheap/old PC. On a
nice newish blade you might be able to add another zero to those
figures
--
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
