> No, for this test, I am not using persistent messages. Would pooling
> connections, instead of just sessions help out?
Not much. But you are using persistent messages. This is the default
delivery mode you cannot change when using QueueRequestor because it
creates the QueueSender.
I made a test here on a local machine. I got 120 request/replies per sec
with one requestor client and 75 with 2. For the replier I create/close a
QueueSender for each reply. When I use an unidentified QueueSender like
this
QueueSender sender = qs.createSender(null);
for (int i=0;i<n;i++)
{
TextMessage msg = (TextMessage)receiver.receive();
TemporaryQueue tq = (TemporaryQueue)msg.getJMSReplyTo();
msg.setText("Re: "+msg.getText());
sender.send(tq,msg);
}
sender.close();
then I get 171 requests/replies per sec.
You can overwrite the persistence for the queue via the explorer. There is
a property named "Queue Persistence" which default is "as_message". Change
it to "non_persistent" and you will have around 400 request/replies per
sec. Note that I ran this all on one machine (450 MHz). You might get
another result due to network I/O.
--
Andreas Mueller, IIT GmbH, Bremen/Germany, http://www.iit.de
SwiftMQ - JMS Enterprise Messaging System, http://www.swiftmq.com
------------------------------------------------------
SwiftMQ developers mailing list * http://www.swiftmq.com
To unsubscribe from this list, send an eMail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and write in the body of your message:
UNSUBSCRIBE developers <your-email-address>
Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
