Hi Duro, kahadb has some trade-offs for scalability and recovery speed vs. performance, but shouldn't that much slower. You can check activemq-throughout.xml config and see if applying some the parameters seen there can help you.
If performance is your main issue (not scalability and recovery) then maybe amq store is the best choice for you. Cheers -- Dejan Bosanac - http://twitter.com/dejanb Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/ ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ Blog - http://www.nighttale.net On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Duro <duroku...@zoznam.sk> wrote: > > Hi, > > i've tested kahadb and kahaPersistenceAdapter using same simple test > conditions i.e. > > - persistent queue > - 3 consumers > - 1 producer > - 25 kb message size (10 000 msgs) > > according this, kahadb has troughput 22 msgs/s while kahaPersistenceAdapter > 333 msgs/s. Similar difference observed using kahadb with amq 5.3, amq 5.4 > snapshot and 5.3.1 snapshot. Why is that? Is it possible to somehow > configure kahadb (or message producer) to get better results? > > Duro > > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/low-persistent-messaging-performance-using-kahadb-tp26747184p26747184.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
