useAsyncSend gave a tremendous speedup and I will try to work from here. I need to reasonably guarantee delivery though of messages, and currently everything is wrapped in a resender, meaning if JmsTemplate throws an Exception, the message and all subsequent are put into a memory queue and resending is automatically done until it succeeds. Pretty low-tech, but works great for when/if ActiveMQ is down for short periods of time.
By just performing a simple test, this mechanism still worked when using async sends (shutting down ActiveMQ during sending) so I'm wondering if I have any additional need of the exception listener, if the exception is still (as it looks like) thrown. // Matthias Gary Tully wrote: > > In the async case, you can set an exception listener to get a calback in > the > event of an async failure. > > On 1 July 2010 17:11, cobrien <clark.obr...@ttmsolutions.com> wrote: > >> >> Matthias, >> If do not require guaranteed delivery to the broker you can set >> jms.useAsyncSend=true so the producer >> does not wait for an acknowledgement from the broker before sending the >> next >> message. >> >> The caveat here is that if message is lost between the producer and >> broker >> you will not be notified. >> >> Clark >> >> www.ttmsolutions.com >> ActiveMQ reference guide at >> http://bit.ly/AMQRefGuide >> >> >> >> >> matthiask wrote: >> > >> > I'm trying to improve the performance of our backend and is currently >> as >> > benchmark using a use case that takes about ~800 ms to execute and >> > produces 40 JMS messages that are put on a queue (BytesMessage). Each >> > message is a few kb. >> > >> > If I dummy out the JMS delivery, the same use case takes about 40 ms to >> > finish, meaning that it spends most of it time waiting for messages to >> get >> > accepted by ActiveMQ. I have also verified this by profiling. >> > >> > The delivery is performed using a JmsTemplate, configured with a pooled >> > connection factory. >> > >> > Without going into more detail, is this expected behavior, around 20 ms >> or >> > so for a message to get delivered, or am I missing something obvious >> that >> > could speed this up. >> > >> > I'm currently looking at making architectural changes that would mean >> that >> > the actual sending of the messages don't need to be synchronized with >> the >> > use case, but it would require some redesigning and I would rather see >> > that I would be able to use the current "simple" approach with messages >> > being sent as they are produced by the application. >> > >> > Any input or help would be greatly appreciated. Any more info I can >> > provide? >> > >> > Matthias >> > >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://old.nabble.com/Slow-producing-of-messages%2C-expected-behaviour--tp29044897p29047632.html >> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > > -- > http://blog.garytully.com > > Open Source Integration > http://fusesource.com > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Slow-producing-of-messages%2C-expected-behaviour--tp29044897p29106386.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
