Justin, I have not tried that. I am trying to push management to use Artemis instead of Classic because I think Artemis will perform better for their heavy workload.
Regards, William Crowell From: Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 11:48 AM To: users@activemq.apache.org <users@activemq.apache.org> Subject: Re: Are there any hardware recommendations for ActiveMQ Classic? Have you tried using your OpenWire client with Artemis? If so, what did you find? Justin On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:05 AM William Crowell <wcrow...@perforce.com.invalid> wrote: > Justin, > > It would be OpenWire. > > Regards, > > William Crowell > > From: Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 10:56 AM > To: users@activemq.apache.org <users@activemq.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Are there any hardware recommendations for ActiveMQ Classic? > Which "Classic library" are you referring to? Artemis supports the OpenWire > protocol used by the JMS client implementation shipped with Classic. > > In many cases you can simply point existing OpenWire clients from Classic > to Artemis and everything will "just work." > > > Justin > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 9:50 AM William Crowell > <wcrow...@perforce.com.invalid> wrote: > > > Justin and Matt, > > > > That’s kind of what I thought. I just wanted to see if there were any > > current benchmarks for Classic. I think there were at one-point years > ago, > > but they are so old. > > > > The goal right now to is produce and consume up to 40 million messages a > > day. Each message would be 400-1000 bytes. I think we would need some > > really beefy hardware for Classic to support this kind of traffic. Our > > clients are coded against Classic library, so it would be difficult to > > switch to Artemis. > > > > Regards, > > > > William Crowell > > > > From: Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > > Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 10:37 AM > > To: users@activemq.apache.org <users@activemq.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: Are there any hardware recommendations for ActiveMQ Classic? > > I agree with Matt 100%. > > > > Aside from wide variation in the workloads there is also wide variation > in > > performance goals. Some folks don't mind a heavy workload with relatively > > high latency. Some folks want the heaviest possible workload with the > > lowest possible latency. > > > > My recommendation would be to start by defining your workload and your > > performance goals. Then start with some kind of middle-of-the-road > hardware > > and do performance benchmarking with your specific workload. Then adjust > > accordingly. Maybe you need more CPU, more RAM, faster disk, faster > > network, etc. If you can't get that then maybe you can modify your > > application's behavior (e.g. batching work into transactions, using > > non-durable vs. durable messages, etc.). Or maybe everything is "good > > enough" and you can move on to other tasks. > > > > Good luck! > > > > > > Justin > > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 9:02 AM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi William- > > > > > > This is a mission impossible question. The hardware required to address > > > different workloads can vary wildly. For example — thousands of > > > connections handling a few million messages per day vs a hundred > > > connections handling 1B messages per day. > > > > > > ActiveMQ can be embedded down to run on a Raspberry Pi or scale up to > > very > > > large heaps on a single broker. > > > > > > That being said— the faster the disk you can get, the faster the > messages > > > will be processed! > > > > > > -Matt Pavlovich > > > > > > > On Feb 19, 2025, at 5:33 AM, William Crowell > > > <wcrow...@perforce.com.INVALID> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Are there any hardware recommendations (not minimum requirements) for > > > ActiveMQ Classic? I am trying to determine what CPU, RAM, and SSD > type I > > > will need when sizing out a production environment. Are there any > recent > > > benchmark tests for a particular hardware setup? What I will probably > > need > > > to do is put together an environment and run JMeter tests against the > > > broker to see if it meets the requirements for the number of messages > > > produced/consumed that my application requires. I am assuming that the > > > more producers/consumers I have then the more CPU cores I will need. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > William Crowell > > > > > > > > > > > > This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or > confidential. > > > If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any > > > attachments and notify us immediately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not > > click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and > know > > the content is safe. > > > > > > This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. > If > > you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any > > attachments and notify us immediately. > > > > > > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not > click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know > the content is safe. > > > This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If > you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any > attachments and notify us immediately. > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us immediately.
