Hi, I have recently run some simple performance tests when consuming msgs within a local JMS transaction (committing after every msgs) and without transaction. There surely was a difference in performance but it was rather small. Unfortunately I don't have any numbers at hand right now but it was fairly in line with this comment from http://activemq.apache.org/should-i-use-transactions.html "Incidentally, its a common misconception that transactions are slow; there's no real difference between a JMS transaction and a Message.acknowledge() from an architectural perspective in ActiveMQ;"
Btw, the maven-activemq-perf-plugin can also be used to test the speed of transacted consumers/producers http://activemq.apache.org/activemq-performance-module-users-manual.html Torsten Mielke tors...@fusesource.com tmie...@blogspot.com On Dec 1, 2011, at 1:40 AM, lzr wrote: > 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
