On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 7/27/06, Paul French <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks James, Judging from the mailing lists you are a very busy man!!
>
> I think you misunderstood my question?
>
> Does Jencks pool sessions OR connections when using JMS?

It pools both


> Using Spring SingleConnectionFactory we reuse the same connection.
However
> Spring will create a new session and consumer/producer on the fly when
using
> the JmsTemplate. Hence my question:
>
>
> Is a new session object fairly lightweight? (from the point of view of
> creating it)

Not in term of latency as it requires a blocking request-response with
a broker. Ditto when creating/closing producers/consumers.


Actually, creating/closing a session and producer uses async one way
messages.  So, latencey should not be an issue unless you are bandwith
constrained.
But creating/closing consumers does use a blocking RPC.

So even using SingleConnectionFactory with JmsTemplate to send 1
message will require 4 request responses purely for the session &
producer - then another one to send the message (if you are not using
async sends). Async sending can't really help avoid the 4 blocking
request-responses that JmsTemplate introduces.


> Hence using Jencks would you not still have to create a
producer/consumer on
> the fly for each of your working threads?

Jencks pools them.

--

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/




--
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com

Reply via email to