You might also look at Christian Posta's blog post to see if any of those ideas and techniques would be of use for your situation: http://blog.christianposta.com/activemq/speeding-up-activemq-persistent-messaging-performance-by-25x/
Tim On Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 11:45 AM Tim Bain <tb...@alumni.duke.edu wrote: > I've never run the broker in that mode, but I'd expect that one major > determiner of your throughput would be the speed at which the disk can do > the frequent, small flushes to disk. I'd expect you to see the best > performance on a locally-attached SSD with low write latency, but it's > possible that you might get similar or better performance in certain > configurations involving fast storage arrays, so YMMV. > > Also, reducing network latency between the producer and the broker could > show a significant improvement if what you have now isn't performant, so > you could pursue that. > > Tim > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018, 2:03 AM PedroRP <pedro.rami...@techonrails.com > wrote: > >> Hi Tim! >> >> Thank you very much for your answer! >> >> Yes, I was using non-durable subscription on my topic. When I changed to >> durable subscription, It didn't lose messages if I use sync sends. The >> main >> problem now is the sending response time. It spends too much time sending >> messages. Is there any way to accelerate it without async sends? >> >> Thanks in advance. >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent from: >> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-f2341805.html >> >
