Bruce thanks for your reply. The consumers create the temporary queue only once, and they are cached in a pool for subsequent usage. We are using tcp connection. If we move to nio connection, will there be any noticeable improvement?
-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Snyder [mailto:bruce.sny...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 1:45 PM To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: Best implementation for reply-request On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Andres Rangel <andr...@corp.moniker.com> wrote: > Hi, > > We have currently running apache activemq 5.2 in a network of brokers > > > > It has close to 1500 producers and 1200 consumers. > > This producers have each one a temporary queue so that will be 1500 > temp queues in the system. > > > > The reply-request is implemented using temporary queues. > > > > > > I would like to know if there's a performance hit by using temporary > queues instead of using another option. > > > > What do you guys think? There's more overhead involved with such constant creation/destruction of temp queues, but that's it. As long as the broker has been tuned to scale for handling such a large number of destinations, then you should be OK: http://activemq.apache.org/scaling-queues.html Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)u8...@4vyy9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*" );' ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ Blog: http://bruceblog.org/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
