Robert Greig wrote:
I wanted to see how both solutions scaled so did tests with increasing
numbers of clients, starting with a single client. The results were:
No clients | CPP | Java
1 | 320 | 324
2 | 395 | 359
4 | 979 | 396
8 | 1912 | 625
Interesting. Did you alter the number of threads for the c++ broker
(--worker-threads)? The default is 5. Last time round you noticed an
improvement with a higher number I believe.
What is your threading model?
A separate thread for accepting connections, then a pool of workers used
in a leader-follower pattern processing io events for each connection.
