There is something not right then b/c when the temp store is created at runtime it is typically the result of flushing non persistent pending messages to disk for a slow consumer. But from your description, all consumers should be queue consumers and all messages persistent. Are there any slow advisory consumers for example?
I guess a quick way to find out what is going on is to take some periodic thread dumps when the broker slows down. The stack traces will help determine the pertinent activity. On 2 August 2011 17:33, James Black <be_st...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Hi Gary, > > thanks for the info: > > AMQ journalling is disabled due to master/slave requirement. > > 8 queues, 1 topic with a virtual topic set up so we can have multiple > consumers consuming from the topic at once. There are multiple consumers on > every queue. > > All messages on all queues are persistent and sessions are transactional. > > Apart from configuring the JDBC storage our configuration is very similar to > that out of the box. Therefore, the topic will be using a VM store and the > queues the default store cursor. > > You suggested the file based store might be an issue but I assume that due > to our config we are not using the file based store at all. > > I just am unsure why the performance is fine for a certain period of time > and then slows so much. > > Thanks, > > Justin > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-JDBC-Storage-Slow-down-tp3712166p3712946.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- http://fusesource.com http://blog.garytully.com
