>From my point of view, one difference between SingleConnectionFactory and PooledConnectionFactory is that SingleConnectionFactory reuse the same connection among all the listeners/consumers and PooledConnectionFactory shares a pooled of connections among the listeners/consumers.
I think if I use DefaultMessageListenerContainers (DMLC) and a PooledConnectionFactory together, the pool might run out of connections because by default every DMLC keeps an opened connection. Therefore, if I had got three DMLCs per application by average, and one hundred application deployed in the server, I would have 300 connections opened in the server. Here there is a similar post about this issue: http://stackoverflow.com/a/25930513/1918308 Based on this answer, it seems it isn't recommended to use DLMC and PooledConnectionFactory together. Using a SingleConnectionFactory per application, there is a decrement of number connections. Following the previous example, I would have 100 connections, one per application. Until now, is there any mistake in my approach? The thing is that I want to go a step further. Bearing in mind the connection object is stateless, I am considering to reuse the same connection among all the applications. Might there be performance problems if all applications share the same connection? -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Production-ConnectionFactory-configuration-with-Spring-tp4708601p4708631.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
