You can look at the specJMS2007 published results here: http://www.spec.org/jms2007/results/jms2007.html
but the results aren't normalized so they cannot be directly compared. Note for example the HW used by RHEL, and compare with that used by the other test runs. At the risk of stating the obvious: It always costs more to handle more messages. It always costs more to handle larger messages. It always costs more to persist messages to disk. Faster HW/SW does the same things faster, or more things in the same time. ----- Michael Hayes B.Sc. (NUI), M.Sc. (DCU), SCSA SCNA -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-rate-comparison-with-RabbitMQ-tp4575958p4579935.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
