I have done performance testing for kahadb, leveldb and replication leveldb. Details:
*Scenario: * > ActiveMQ : 5.10 > Machine : Unix > I tested performance by sending messages to the broker continuously with > any sleep or wait on producer side and measure the throughput by messages > sent per seconds. The throughput increase initially but after some some it > becomes constant. Similarly consumer is also running and consuming the > messages. I also measure messages received per seconds. I can see that > after some time producer and consumer throughput becomes equal. And that > is what I consider as throughput. > I run each test mentioned below for ~2 hours. > I did all tests by sending persistence messages. *Results: * *LevelDB: * 1 producer 1 consumer: 0.48K/sec(Queue) || 0.64K/sec (Topic) 2 producer 1 consumer: 0.88K/sec(Queue) || 0.79K/sec (Topic) 1 producer 2 consumer: 0.48K/sec(Queue) || 0.64K/sec (Topic) *kahaDB: * 1 producer 1 consumer: 0.58K/sec(Queue) || 0.6K/sec (Topic) 2 producer 1 consumer: 0.6K/sec(Queue) || 0.6K/sec (Topic) *Replicated Leveldb: * 1 producer 1 consumer: 0.06K/sec(Queue) || 0.06K/sec (Topic) 2 producer 1 consumer: 0.07K/sec(Queue) || 0.06K/sec (Topic) 1 producer 2 consumer: 0.06K/sec(Queue) || 0.05K/sec (Topic) Questions: > Performance is same with kahadb and leveldb which is strange. Why kahadb > performance is now higher? Any particular configuration I need to tuneup ? > Does kahadb provides better performance with multiple producers and single > consumers ?(multiple writes) > Replicated leveldb performance is too low. Almost 10 times going down. Is > this expected ? Or I should tune some configurations to get better > performance? Also If there is any testing done by ActiveMQ developers, please point me to that. Thanks, Anuj -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Kahadb-vs-Leveldb-vs-Replciated-Leveldb-Performance-Results-tp4688306.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
