The current persistent manager implementations are not very performant. There are a number of reasons for this, but most of it is down to a simple implementation that aims at correctness rather than speed.
1) Use of JTA transaction in jdbc2 is unnecessary - a local jdbc transaction i.e. setAutoCommit(false) is enough 2) Make use of bulk writes to the db - e.g. for transactional sessions, but also to relax the requirement that messages are persisted on each send where this is less important for the application. 3) Lazily write the transaction record - it is only necessary when there are actually persistent messages in the transaction. 4) Improve the sql - db indexes, etc. 5) Other optimizations in the persistence architecture jdbc3 is an attempt to reduce the cloning of messages for topics this could be taken further with a more dedicated message store. Regards, Adrian View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3823529#3823529 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3823529 ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
