Gaurav-
We have redundant master/slave brokers, pretty beefy machines, 3120MB
allocated on the JVM.
<policyEntry queue=">" producerFlowControl="false" memoryLimit="2mb"
prioritizedMessages="true">
<pendingQueuePolicy>
<vmQueueCursor/>
</pendingQueuePolicy>
</policyEntry>
<persistenceAdapter>
<kahaDB directory="${activemq.data}/kahadb"
cleanupInterval="300000" checkpointInterval="50000"
journalMaxWriteBatchSize="62k"
journalMaxFileLength="5g"
indexCacheSize="100000" indexWriteBatchSize="100000"/>
</persistenceAdapter>
Using in the producer side using PooledConnectionFactory (with a pool size
of 100, not sure of utilization, but thats held up so far)
If there was something else you were interested in let me know. I've been
thinking about a clustered solution as well. As for message persistance, I
have it turned off, haven't been able to get a combination working nicely...
Jeremy
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Gaurav Sharma
<gaurav.cs.sha...@gmail.com>wrote:
> That's pretty good volume without pooling the connexn factory. I don't
> have numbers just yet but it will be within an order of magnitude of that.
> Mind sharing what message store you are using for persistence and the
> broker topology.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 20, 2012, at 12:13, Jeremy Levy <jel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks again for the quick response. That's good info. What volume of
> > messages are you processing? I'm doing about 25 million a day.
> >
> >
> > Jeremy
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Gaurav Sharma
> > <gaurav.cs.sha...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Connection factory is thread-safe, so, a single instance should be fine.
> >> Pooled connection factory should help greatly. One other optimization I
> >> added was to keep a concurrent LRU cache of DestinationViewMBean keyed
> off
> >> of destination name because I am heavily relying on JMX for destination
> >> lookups. That, in conjunction with a single instance of BrokerViewMBean,
> >> has so far worked well for me. I am still working on productionizing the
> >> config and will be doing some perf-testing to benchmark the config. My
> >> service users have very high throughput requirements (along with message
> >> durability), so, I have had to carefully plan the broker topology
> (current
> >> setup: multi-master/slave brokers with db message store). I have still
> not
> >> figured out if it there is an out of the box config to shard the
> >> activemq_msgs schema along with keeping a single activemq_locks table
> per
> >> every broker master. Hopefully, someone else with a high performance
> >> persistent configuration can share their experience and config.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jeremy Levy <jel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks Gaurav-
> >>>
> >>> I'll give the Pooled Factory a try. What do you think about keeping
> once
> >>> instance of the connection factory around statically? I've played with
> >>> async sending with mixed results.
> >>>
> >>> Jeremy
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Gaurav Sharma
> >>> <gaurav.cs.sha...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> You might wanna use the PooledConnectionFactory wrapper with the
> >>>> ActiveMQConnectionFactory. That's what I switched to too. If you have
> a
> >>>> listener, you will have to leave the session open as well until msg
> >>>> delivery. I am using mysql as the msg-store and nio connector
> transport
> >>> to
> >>>> the broker. Also, dep on your use case, try to turn on async sending
> if
> >>>> possible. There are many perf knobs that can be turned.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jul 19, 2012, at 16:32, Jeremy Levy <jel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I suspect that the way I am currently producing messages within my
> >>>>> application server is wrong.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We using JBoss 5.1 with a standalone ActiveMQ 5.6.0 broker. In
> >> regards
> >>>> to
> >>>>> producing messages I am caching a static instance of the
> >>>>> ActiveMQConnectionFactory, everything else
> >>>>> Connection,Session,Destination,Producer is created with each message
> >>>>> created/sent.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've noticed that under very high message creation it appears as
> >> though
> >>>>> many connections to the broker are being created (as observed using
> >>>>> netstat) on the machine producing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It feel like there is no connection pooling being done.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I could also not use ActiveMQConnectionFactory at all and create a
> >>> JBoss
> >>>> /
> >>>>> ActiveMQ datasource and do the lookup via InitalContext etc..
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As I'm currently doing this is there connection pooling, should I be
> >>>> doing
> >>>>> this differently?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jeremy
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jeremy Levy
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy Levy
>
--
Jeremy Levy
