Hey
Thx for the reply.. after reading ur blog address i realised that i had
already referred ur blog in this context. I guess the article was some 2
year old article :)
But this tells me that you are exactly the perfect person to have all my
doubts cleared:)
I am trying to implement pooling. As far as I understood from Pooling Code
of ActiveMq, they are creating some conns, creating multiple sessions on
them and creating one producer from each of these sessions. Is this the
correct approach or shud we have multiple producers from each of these
sessions.So basically this is session pooling. I don't think we are pooling
our producers anywhere. Does making pool of producers also makes sense or is
pooling till this level sufficient.
>Also what should be my approach for having pooling(or any thing that
improves performance) for consumers.
2) There is this another problem. Sorry for asking so much out of u.
There is this thread in nabble where s.1 had asked how to reconnect to
activeMQ if their broker goes down.The reply says we need to have
failover:(tcp://localhost:61616) as the broker url.
I agree with it, but I want to know that in case the broker goes down I
guess we will be getting JMSException when we try to send messages to it. So
if we have a exceptionListener registered against the connection then we can
code the message listener to make sure it tries to get a new connection.
So if that is the case how does this failover thing works, and if this
failover thing works and i have a exceptionlistener registered will it still
get the exception. And in what cases will the registered exception listener
receive/won't receive the exception.
3) Also in PooledSesion class in close method why only consumers are being
closed and not producers.
gnodet wrote:
>
> The block synchronizes on the message producer, which means it's here
> in case the *same* producer is used from several different threads, so
> it should not have much overhead when using multiple producers (which
> would be recommand afaik).
>
> For the pooling part, the first thing is that consuming messages and
> pooling is quite incompatible usually. The main problem is that if
> you keep unused consumers alive, messages can be waiting on the
> consumer and thus never be actually delivered (if you don't consumer
> those messages or close the consumer).
> For session / producer pooling, you should be free to use the pooled
> connection factory.
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 15:55, soody <atins...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I am working on JMS pooling and have a few doubts
>> 1)I was going through the pool package of ActiveMQ. In
>> PooledMessageProducer
>> we have s.th like
>>
>> // just in case let only one thread send at once
>> synchronized (messageProducer) {
>> messageProducer.send(destination, message, deliveryMode,
>> priority, timeToLive);
>> }
>>
>> in the send method.
>>
>> I am not sure why we need to have the send synchronized. AS far as I
>> understand we can use as many producers from a session and send msgs in
>> parallel from them to the same destination.... Only thing that can get
>> messed up is there will be no order in which these msgs are sent. But I
>> guess when we decided to use multiple threads to send msgs we have
>> anyways
>> made our choice to drop the sequencing order.
>>
>> 2)Also there has been much discussion the pooling thing but there is
>> nothing
>> concrete. I guess for any JMS client we can write a wrapper around the
>> PooledConnectionFactory and other classes and make sure that we have a
>> number of connections and a pool of sessions associated with it. We can
>> use
>> these for pooling.
>> Does it make any diff if we use this for producing or consumption of
>> msgs.
>> Please note I am talking about a standalone JMS Client, no springs
>> included
>> and a pretty generic client that can work with any JMS provider.
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-pooling...-pool-package-in-activeMQ-tp21811493p21811493.html
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/JMS-pooling...-pool-package-in-activeMQ-tp21811493p21817781.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
