Hi Dejan, Thanks for the tip. I'll try some of those configs. Would it perhaps be usefull to do a kind of compare/contrast page between the different persistence strategies on the wiki? I'd be willing to make a start with the page an let the experts fill in the details. Regards, Maarten
Dejan Bosanac wrote: > > Hi Marteen, > > both adapters can do that work. KahaDB is improvement over AMQ persistence > adapter. It provides better scalability (as it uses less threads) and > better > recovery time (as it uses indexes). However it is a bit slower, but still > performant enough. I'd suggest you use one of the configuration files > distributed with 5.3.0 release as a starting point of your configuration. > > 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 Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Maarten_D <maarten.dir...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> Hi, >> I'm a little confused as to which persistence adapter I should use, >> perhaps >> someone can give me some guidance. >> >> My applications requires AMQ to handle a steady stream of several hundred >> messages per hour, with occasional bursts of several tens of thousands >> per >> hour (on a topic). >> >> Which would be the best persistence adapter for this scenario? >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Maarten Dirkse >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://old.nabble.com/amqPersistenceAdapter-or-kahaDB--tp27113427p27113427.html >> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > > ----- > Dejan Bosanac > > Open Source Integration - http://fusesource.com/ > ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ > Blog - http://www.nighttale.net > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/amqPersistenceAdapter-or-kahaDB--tp27113427p27115318.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
