According to my comprehension of the JMS Spec, without transaction and AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE in session the disk sync should occur once a meesage is get by the consumer; it's just like the case each message has a transaction committing? In this case the performance of the two cases should be similar, right?
At 2011-12-01 01:12:48,"Gary Tully" <gary.tu...@gmail.com> wrote: >For producers, only use transactions is you are sending more than one >message, so for batching. Jms already guarantees a disk sync when a >send returns. > >For clients do what you wish. > >Do try and cache connections/sessions/prodcuers >and if you have a single consumer cache that. > >Remeber, transactions mean disk syncs, so you will always be limited >by the speed of a fsync to your disk. > >2011/11/30 lzr <jsw...@163.com>: >> Dear all, >> >> By my test, the performance down greatly than the test case without the >> transaction. >> For same program: >> Without transaction in Session, 1000 tps; >> With transaction in Session, about 10~20 tps which is absolutel y my >> expectation!!!! >> I attached my source files and configuration files. It's much appreciated if >> any suggestion. >> >> Thanks a lot! >> >> > > > >-- >http://fusesource.com >http://blog.garytully.com
