Although syncOnWrite will be slow - I think the size of the data logs
- 1000mb is very large. Its is possible that syncOnWrite will provide
acceptable performance for smaller data log size - have you tried it
with the default size ?
On Dec 21, 2007, at 4:18 AM, EricMeena wrote:
I was to a point where the AMQ performance was really impressive,
but when I
added some AMQ message storage configurations, the performance becomes
questionable, I think I am combining wrong properties:
I have two JMS clients(producer & receiver), I am sending about 10,000
messages (500KB each) and receiving them on the other side.
This is what I am using:
- MS Windows XP Pro, Version 2002, SP2, Core(TM)2 CPU, T 7200 @
2.00GHz,
1.66 GHz, 1.99 GB of RAM
- ActiveMQ v5
- Sun JVM 5
- My JMS clients use a spring JmsTemplate and a listenerContainer.
(For
connectionFactory, I am using this:
org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory). I am using a queue.
- I am configuring the message storage within the default AMQ broker
configuration file (activemq.xml) as follows:
<persistenceAdapter>
<amqPersistenceAdapter directory="C:/ActiveMQ/ActiveMQ_Storage"
maxFileLength="1000mb"
directoryArchive="C:/ActiveMQ/ActiveMQ_Storage_Archive"
archiveDataLogs="true" syncOnWrite="true"/>
</persistenceAdapter>
Problem:
Everything was fine until I added the sycOnWrite="true", I could
send and
consume up 17 messages per second. With this prop added, the sending
itself
becomes a little slow, but reading gets worse. The sender finishes
its job
while the consumer is not even half way done. This led to a
performance of 1
message per second.
I added few properties to fix this (like persistentIndex and
indexBinSize),
none helped the situation.
Any idea? What is wrong here?
Thanks in advance.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-v5.0.0-Performance-issue-tp14450031s2354p14450031.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
