Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

śr., 26 cze 2019 o 09:43 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):

> Hi:
>
> Yes, that doesn't have a pool config right now. I was testing with and
> without pool configs in pax-jms, but then I might have pushed the one
> without pool config.
>
> I had to switch to blueprint based provider as I was able to process just
> 2-3 messages per second(with pax-jms) compared to 200-300 messages per
> second (with blueprint-based connectionfactory provider).
>
> I will investigate this and try to get a better picture of this problem,
> following your suggestion.
>
> I will post back on this thread if I manage to get the results.
>

Sure - I'll be checking.


> Thank you.
>
> and wish you a nice holiday :)
>

thanks! :)

regards
Grzegorz Grzybek


> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
> On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 at 9:27:25 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>
>> Hello Kushal
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/blob/DWH-PAX-JMS-Demo/datasources/broker-datasource/src/main/resources/config/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-activemq.cfg
>> doesn't have any pooling configuration.
>>
>> on Monday I'm starting my deserved, 2 week holidays so I won't do much
>> investigation now.
>>
>> If you believe the performance is worse with pax-jms, please try getting
>> for example 1000 thread dumps every 100ms - if there are lot of threads
>> waiting to acquire the connection, there may be pooling configuration
>> problem. Generally a thread dump (set of dumps) can give you some clues.
>>
>> regards
>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>
>> śr., 26 cze 2019 o 08:07 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):
>>
>>> Hi:
>>>
>>> sorry, took a bit longer than expected. Currently, I have switched to
>>> blueprint based connectionfactory provider. The performance is much better
>>> this way, as.
>>>
>>> I have implemented two scenarios, one with pax-jms based provider and
>>> the other is blueprint based provider.
>>>
>>> pax-jms based provider:
>>> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-PAX-JMS-Demo
>>> blueprint-based provider:
>>> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-Blueprint-JMS
>>>
>>> I created two different bundles with camel routes (one to produce a
>>> message and the other to consume a message). The broker bundle (in both
>>> cases) will provide two diff connection factories, i.e. eai-producer and
>>> eai-consumer. I have used them in the camel routes respectively.
>>>
>>> While using pax-jms, I see just a single connection from the ActiveMQ
>>> web console. In my example, I have given just one route. While, in my real
>>> case scenario, I had multiple routes, and all of them were under the same
>>> connection.
>>>
>>> My assumption was, there should have been at least two different
>>> connections, as I had two different connection factories.
>>>
>>> I have added a docker-compose file for activemq broker.
>>>
>>> Kindly, please let me know if I need to explain the case further.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Cooshal.
>>>
>>> On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 3:33:26 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:

 Hello

 my list of unread (unanswered) emails is too long ;) Please let me know
 when you add this branch with blueprint, so I can compare these two
 approaches. Then I'll continue the investigation of your case.

 regards
 Grzegorz Grzybek

 śr., 19 cze 2019 o 09:13 Kushal Gautam 
 napisał(a):

> Hi:
>
> Sorry for the confusion, and mix-ups.
>
> Those were totally different approaches that I had tried. I will
> explain what I did.
>
> 1. Initially, before trying out pax-jms, I was providing the broker
> connectionfactory using blueprint, as I had mentioned earlier. This
> approach was working fine enough, and then we decided to switch to 
> pax-jms.
> 2. In the second scenario, the broker connectionfactory is entirely
> provided by pax-jms. Blueprint is not used in this case.
>
> I have two connectionfactories, and I am using them as:
>
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" filter="(
> osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)" availability="mandatory" />
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" filter="(
> osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)" availability="mandatory" />
>
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>  ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
> 
>
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>  ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
> 
>
> In both cases, I have set maxConnections to 20. Thus, with two
> connectionFactories, I observed that, with pax-jms only 20 connections 
> were
> there. While, with the blueprint approach, I could see 20(consumer) +
> 20(producer) connections.
>
> and I am using this in my camel routes as:
>
> from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")  ...
>
> I will share a project where this problem can be replicated.
>
> My pax-jms based approach 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Kushal Gautam]

Hi:

Yes, that doesn't have a pool config right now. I was testing with and 
without pool configs in pax-jms, but then I might have pushed the one 
without pool config.

I had to switch to blueprint based provider as I was able to process just 
2-3 messages per second(with pax-jms) compared to 200-300 messages per 
second (with blueprint-based connectionfactory provider).

I will investigate this and try to get a better picture of this problem, 
following your suggestion.

I will post back on this thread if I manage to get the results.

Thank you.

and wish you a nice holiday :)

Regards,
Cooshal.

On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 at 9:27:25 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>
> Hello Kushal
>
>
> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/blob/DWH-PAX-JMS-Demo/datasources/broker-datasource/src/main/resources/config/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-activemq.cfg
>  
> doesn't have any pooling configuration.
>
> on Monday I'm starting my deserved, 2 week holidays so I won't do much 
> investigation now.
>
> If you believe the performance is worse with pax-jms, please try getting 
> for example 1000 thread dumps every 100ms - if there are lot of threads 
> waiting to acquire the connection, there may be pooling configuration 
> problem. Generally a thread dump (set of dumps) can give you some clues.
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
> śr., 26 cze 2019 o 08:07 Kushal Gautam > 
> napisał(a):
>
>> Hi:
>>
>> sorry, took a bit longer than expected. Currently, I have switched to 
>> blueprint based connectionfactory provider. The performance is much better 
>> this way, as.
>>
>> I have implemented two scenarios, one with pax-jms based provider and the 
>> other is blueprint based provider.
>>
>> pax-jms based provider: 
>> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-PAX-JMS-Demo
>> blueprint-based provider: 
>> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-Blueprint-JMS
>>
>> I created two different bundles with camel routes (one to produce a 
>> message and the other to consume a message). The broker bundle (in both 
>> cases) will provide two diff connection factories, i.e. eai-producer and 
>> eai-consumer. I have used them in the camel routes respectively.
>>
>> While using pax-jms, I see just a single connection from the ActiveMQ web 
>> console. In my example, I have given just one route. While, in my real case 
>> scenario, I had multiple routes, and all of them were under the same 
>> connection.
>>
>> My assumption was, there should have been at least two different 
>> connections, as I had two different connection factories.
>>
>> I have added a docker-compose file for activemq broker.
>>
>> Kindly, please let me know if I need to explain the case further.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>> On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 3:33:26 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> my list of unread (unanswered) emails is too long ;) Please let me know 
>>> when you add this branch with blueprint, so I can compare these two 
>>> approaches. Then I'll continue the investigation of your case.
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>>
>>> śr., 19 cze 2019 o 09:13 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):
>>>
 Hi:

 Sorry for the confusion, and mix-ups.

 Those were totally different approaches that I had tried. I will 
 explain what I did.

 1. Initially, before trying out pax-jms, I was providing the broker 
 connectionfactory using blueprint, as I had mentioned earlier. This 
 approach was working fine enough, and then we decided to switch to pax-jms.
 2. In the second scenario, the broker connectionfactory is entirely 
 provided by pax-jms. Blueprint is not used in this case.

 I have two connectionfactories, and I am using them as:

 >>> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
 filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)" 
 availability="mandatory" />
 >>> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
 filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)" 
 availability="mandatory" />

 >>> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
 >>> ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
 

 >>> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
 >>> ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
 

 In both cases, I have set maxConnections to 20. Thus, with two 
 connectionFactories, I observed that, with pax-jms only 20 connections 
 were 
 there. While, with the blueprint approach, I could see 20(consumer) + 
 20(producer) connections.

 and I am using this in my camel routes as:

 from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")  ...

 I will share a project where this problem can be replicated.

 My pax-jms based approach is in this (
 https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms) project. I will update 
 this project later (on a different branch) with the blueprint based 
 approach as well. It does not have camel routes yet, I will add 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

Hello Kushal

https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/blob/DWH-PAX-JMS-Demo/datasources/broker-datasource/src/main/resources/config/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-activemq.cfg
doesn't have any pooling configuration.

on Monday I'm starting my deserved, 2 week holidays so I won't do much
investigation now.

If you believe the performance is worse with pax-jms, please try getting
for example 1000 thread dumps every 100ms - if there are lot of threads
waiting to acquire the connection, there may be pooling configuration
problem. Generally a thread dump (set of dumps) can give you some clues.

regards
Grzegorz Grzybek

śr., 26 cze 2019 o 08:07 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):

> Hi:
>
> sorry, took a bit longer than expected. Currently, I have switched to
> blueprint based connectionfactory provider. The performance is much better
> this way, as.
>
> I have implemented two scenarios, one with pax-jms based provider and the
> other is blueprint based provider.
>
> pax-jms based provider:
> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-PAX-JMS-Demo
> blueprint-based provider:
> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-Blueprint-JMS
>
> I created two different bundles with camel routes (one to produce a
> message and the other to consume a message). The broker bundle (in both
> cases) will provide two diff connection factories, i.e. eai-producer and
> eai-consumer. I have used them in the camel routes respectively.
>
> While using pax-jms, I see just a single connection from the ActiveMQ web
> console. In my example, I have given just one route. While, in my real case
> scenario, I had multiple routes, and all of them were under the same
> connection.
>
> My assumption was, there should have been at least two different
> connections, as I had two different connection factories.
>
> I have added a docker-compose file for activemq broker.
>
> Kindly, please let me know if I need to explain the case further.
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
> On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 3:33:26 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> my list of unread (unanswered) emails is too long ;) Please let me know
>> when you add this branch with blueprint, so I can compare these two
>> approaches. Then I'll continue the investigation of your case.
>>
>> regards
>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>
>> śr., 19 cze 2019 o 09:13 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):
>>
>>> Hi:
>>>
>>> Sorry for the confusion, and mix-ups.
>>>
>>> Those were totally different approaches that I had tried. I will explain
>>> what I did.
>>>
>>> 1. Initially, before trying out pax-jms, I was providing the broker
>>> connectionfactory using blueprint, as I had mentioned earlier. This
>>> approach was working fine enough, and then we decided to switch to pax-jms.
>>> 2. In the second scenario, the broker connectionfactory is entirely
>>> provided by pax-jms. Blueprint is not used in this case.
>>>
>>> I have two connectionfactories, and I am using them as:
>>>
>>> >> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
>>> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)"
>>> availability="mandatory" />
>>> >> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
>>> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)"
>>> availability="mandatory" />
>>>
>>> >> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>>> >> ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
>>> 
>>>
>>> >> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>>> >> ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
>>> 
>>>
>>> In both cases, I have set maxConnections to 20. Thus, with two
>>> connectionFactories, I observed that, with pax-jms only 20 connections were
>>> there. While, with the blueprint approach, I could see 20(consumer) +
>>> 20(producer) connections.
>>>
>>> and I am using this in my camel routes as:
>>>
>>> from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")  ...
>>>
>>> I will share a project where this problem can be replicated.
>>>
>>> My pax-jms based approach is in this (
>>> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms) project. I will update
>>> this project later (on a different branch) with the blueprint based
>>> approach as well. It does not have camel routes yet, I will add some camel
>>> routes to demonstrate this issue.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Cooshal.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 8:01:19 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:

 Hello

 But as you wrote, you had this blueprint:

 >>> class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
 
 
 
 

 >>> class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
 
 >>> ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
 
 ...
 >>> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
 
 
 >>> value="${PRODUCER_JNDI_NAME}" />
 
 
 ...

 which means it's not related to pax-jms. But additionally you added
 pax-jms configuration (factory PID) that does one thing - checks OSGi
 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Kushal Gautam]

Hi:

sorry, took a bit longer than expected. Currently, I have switched to 
blueprint based connectionfactory provider. The performance is much better 
this way, as.

I have implemented two scenarios, one with pax-jms based provider and the 
other is blueprint based provider.

pax-jms based provider: 
https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-PAX-JMS-Demo
blueprint-based provider: 
https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms/tree/DWH-Blueprint-JMS

I created two different bundles with camel routes (one to produce a message 
and the other to consume a message). The broker bundle (in both cases) will 
provide two diff connection factories, i.e. eai-producer and eai-consumer. 
I have used them in the camel routes respectively.

While using pax-jms, I see just a single connection from the ActiveMQ web 
console. In my example, I have given just one route. While, in my real case 
scenario, I had multiple routes, and all of them were under the same 
connection.

My assumption was, there should have been at least two different 
connections, as I had two different connection factories.

I have added a docker-compose file for activemq broker.

Kindly, please let me know if I need to explain the case further.

Regards,
Cooshal.

On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 3:33:26 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> my list of unread (unanswered) emails is too long ;) Please let me know 
> when you add this branch with blueprint, so I can compare these two 
> approaches. Then I'll continue the investigation of your case.
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
> śr., 19 cze 2019 o 09:13 Kushal Gautam > 
> napisał(a):
>
>> Hi:
>>
>> Sorry for the confusion, and mix-ups.
>>
>> Those were totally different approaches that I had tried. I will explain 
>> what I did.
>>
>> 1. Initially, before trying out pax-jms, I was providing the broker 
>> connectionfactory using blueprint, as I had mentioned earlier. This 
>> approach was working fine enough, and then we decided to switch to pax-jms.
>> 2. In the second scenario, the broker connectionfactory is entirely 
>> provided by pax-jms. Blueprint is not used in this case.
>>
>> I have two connectionfactories, and I am using them as:
>>
>> > interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
>> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)" 
>> availability="mandatory" />
>> > interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
>> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)" 
>> availability="mandatory" />
>>
>> > class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>> > ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
>> 
>>
>> > class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>> > ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
>> 
>>
>> In both cases, I have set maxConnections to 20. Thus, with two 
>> connectionFactories, I observed that, with pax-jms only 20 connections were 
>> there. While, with the blueprint approach, I could see 20(consumer) + 
>> 20(producer) connections.
>>
>> and I am using this in my camel routes as:
>>
>> from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")  ...
>>
>> I will share a project where this problem can be replicated.
>>
>> My pax-jms based approach is in this (
>> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms) project. I will update 
>> this project later (on a different branch) with the blueprint based 
>> approach as well. It does not have camel routes yet, I will add some camel 
>> routes to demonstrate this issue.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 8:01:19 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> But as you wrote, you had this blueprint:
>>>
>>> >> class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> >> class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
>>> 
>>> >> ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
>>> 
>>> ...
>>> >> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
>>> 
>>> 
>>> >> value="${PRODUCER_JNDI_NAME}" />
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ...
>>>
>>> which means it's not related to pax-jms. But additionally you added 
>>> pax-jms configuration (factory PID) that does one thing - checks OSGi 
>>> services with javax.jms.ConnectionFactory interfaces (which is your 
>>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory) and wraps it again in the 
>>> pooling connection factory.
>>>
>>> Can you share your entire project (before and after adding pax-jms)?
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>>
>>> wt., 18 cze 2019 o 16:49 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):
>>>
 Hi:

 Here's what I have observed.

 If I provide the broker service by installing the broker bundle as an 
 artifact (using the blueprint configuration as I had shared before), then 
 there are altogether 41 connections(one is of Temp Advisory queue, I 
 guess), because max-connections is set to 20 for producer and consumer 
 each.

 But, with pax-jms config, I observed that I have just 20 connections 
 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

Hello

my list of unread (unanswered) emails is too long ;) Please let me know
when you add this branch with blueprint, so I can compare these two
approaches. Then I'll continue the investigation of your case.

regards
Grzegorz Grzybek

śr., 19 cze 2019 o 09:13 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):

> Hi:
>
> Sorry for the confusion, and mix-ups.
>
> Those were totally different approaches that I had tried. I will explain
> what I did.
>
> 1. Initially, before trying out pax-jms, I was providing the broker
> connectionfactory using blueprint, as I had mentioned earlier. This
> approach was working fine enough, and then we decided to switch to pax-jms.
> 2. In the second scenario, the broker connectionfactory is entirely
> provided by pax-jms. Blueprint is not used in this case.
>
> I have two connectionfactories, and I am using them as:
>
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)"
> availability="mandatory" />
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)"
> availability="mandatory" />
>
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
> 
> 
>
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
> 
> 
>
> In both cases, I have set maxConnections to 20. Thus, with two
> connectionFactories, I observed that, with pax-jms only 20 connections were
> there. While, with the blueprint approach, I could see 20(consumer) +
> 20(producer) connections.
>
> and I am using this in my camel routes as:
>
> from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")  ...
>
> I will share a project where this problem can be replicated.
>
> My pax-jms based approach is in this (
> https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms) project. I will update
> this project later (on a different branch) with the blueprint based
> approach as well. It does not have camel routes yet, I will add some camel
> routes to demonstrate this issue.
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 8:01:19 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> But as you wrote, you had this blueprint:
>>
>> > class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> > class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> > ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
>> 
>> ...
>> > interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> 
>> > value="${PRODUCER_JNDI_NAME}" />
>> 
>> 
>> ...
>>
>> which means it's not related to pax-jms. But additionally you added
>> pax-jms configuration (factory PID) that does one thing - checks OSGi
>> services with javax.jms.ConnectionFactory interfaces (which is your
>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory) and wraps it again in the
>> pooling connection factory.
>>
>> Can you share your entire project (before and after adding pax-jms)?
>>
>> regards
>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>
>> wt., 18 cze 2019 o 16:49 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):
>>
>>> Hi:
>>>
>>> Here's what I have observed.
>>>
>>> If I provide the broker service by installing the broker bundle as an
>>> artifact (using the blueprint configuration as I had shared before), then
>>> there are altogether 41 connections(one is of Temp Advisory queue, I
>>> guess), because max-connections is set to 20 for producer and consumer each.
>>>
>>> But, with pax-jms config, I observed that I have just 20 connections
>>> (although I have set pool.maxConnections = 20) for both producer and
>>> consumer. I guess, this could be the bottleneck of the performance.
>>>
>>> In both scenarios, the route bundles are same. Only the broker service
>>> provider is diff.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Cooshal.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:09:24 PM UTC+2, Kushal Gautam wrote:

 I am using it like this:

 from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")
 ...
 ...

 Is there a performance lag for this as well ?


 On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:06:20 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
 wrote:
>
> Why don't you set the connection factory directly on the camel-jms URI
> ?
>
> For instance:  uri="jms:queue:foo?connectionFactory=#jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
>
> Regards
> JB
> On 18/06/2019 16:02, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>
> well, I am using them as:
>
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" filter="(
> osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)" availability="mandatory" />
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" filter="(
> osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)" availability="mandatory" />
>
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>  ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
> 
>
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>  ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
> 
>
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:59:28 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Kushal Gautam]

Hi:

Sorry for the confusion, and mix-ups.

Those were totally different approaches that I had tried. I will explain 
what I did.

1. Initially, before trying out pax-jms, I was providing the broker 
connectionfactory using blueprint, as I had mentioned earlier. This 
approach was working fine enough, and then we decided to switch to pax-jms.
2. In the second scenario, the broker connectionfactory is entirely 
provided by pax-jms. Blueprint is not used in this case.

I have two connectionfactories, and I am using them as:












In both cases, I have set maxConnections to 20. Thus, with two 
connectionFactories, I observed that, with pax-jms only 20 connections were 
there. While, with the blueprint approach, I could see 20(consumer) + 
20(producer) connections.

and I am using this in my camel routes as:

from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")  ...

I will share a project where this problem can be replicated.

My pax-jms based approach is in this (
https://github.com/cooshal/karaf-assembly-jms) project. I will update this 
project later (on a different branch) with the blueprint based approach as 
well. It does not have camel routes yet, I will add some camel routes to 
demonstrate this issue.

Regards,
Cooshal.


On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 8:01:19 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> But as you wrote, you had this blueprint:
>
>  class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>  class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
> 
>  />
> 
> ...
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
> 
> 
>  value="${PRODUCER_JNDI_NAME}" />
> 
> 
> ...
>
> which means it's not related to pax-jms. But additionally you added 
> pax-jms configuration (factory PID) that does one thing - checks OSGi 
> services with javax.jms.ConnectionFactory interfaces (which is your 
> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory) and wraps it again in the 
> pooling connection factory.
>
> Can you share your entire project (before and after adding pax-jms)?
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
> wt., 18 cze 2019 o 16:49 Kushal Gautam > 
> napisał(a):
>
>> Hi:
>>
>> Here's what I have observed.
>>
>> If I provide the broker service by installing the broker bundle as an 
>> artifact (using the blueprint configuration as I had shared before), then 
>> there are altogether 41 connections(one is of Temp Advisory queue, I 
>> guess), because max-connections is set to 20 for producer and consumer each.
>>
>> But, with pax-jms config, I observed that I have just 20 connections 
>> (although I have set pool.maxConnections = 20) for both producer and 
>> consumer. I guess, this could be the bottleneck of the performance.
>>
>> In both scenarios, the route bundles are same. Only the broker service 
>> provider is diff.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:09:24 PM UTC+2, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>>>
>>> I am using it like this:
>>>
>>> from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy") 
>>> ...
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Is there a performance lag for this as well ?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:06:20 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>>> wrote:

 Why don't you set the connection factory directly on the camel-jms URI ?

 For instance: >>> uri="jms:queue:foo?connectionFactory=#jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>

 Regards
 JB
 On 18/06/2019 16:02, Kushal Gautam wrote:

 well, I am using them as: 

 >>> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
 filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)" 
 availability="mandatory" />
 >>> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
 filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)" 
 availability="mandatory" />
 
 >>> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
 >>> ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
 
 
 >>> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
 >>> ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
 

 On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:59:28 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
 wrote: 
>
> If you have two ConnectionFactory services, maybe you use only one 
> service, that would explain why you only have one connection (with one 
> producer and one consumer).
>
> Regards
> JB
> On 18/06/2019 15:52, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>
> Hi: 
>
> ok. that's what I thought.
>
> So, here is my scenario. I have 4 karaf instances, and each instance 
> has two pax-jms configurations(one for producer and one for consumer). 
> But, 
> in the connections tab, I see just one connection per instance. Is this a 
> normal behavior? Because, I have two pax-jms configs and shldn't they 
> have 
> two connections per instance, in this case? I have to verify this thing 
> with my previous implementation (while deploying broker as 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

Hello

But as you wrote, you had this blueprint:











...






...

which means it's not related to pax-jms. But additionally you added pax-jms
configuration (factory PID) that does one thing - checks OSGi services with
javax.jms.ConnectionFactory interfaces (which is your
org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory) and wraps it again in the
pooling connection factory.

Can you share your entire project (before and after adding pax-jms)?

regards
Grzegorz Grzybek

wt., 18 cze 2019 o 16:49 Kushal Gautam  napisał(a):

> Hi:
>
> Here's what I have observed.
>
> If I provide the broker service by installing the broker bundle as an
> artifact (using the blueprint configuration as I had shared before), then
> there are altogether 41 connections(one is of Temp Advisory queue, I
> guess), because max-connections is set to 20 for producer and consumer each.
>
> But, with pax-jms config, I observed that I have just 20 connections
> (although I have set pool.maxConnections = 20) for both producer and
> consumer. I guess, this could be the bottleneck of the performance.
>
> In both scenarios, the route bundles are same. Only the broker service
> provider is diff.
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:09:24 PM UTC+2, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>>
>> I am using it like this:
>>
>> from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy")
>> ...
>> ...
>>
>> Is there a performance lag for this as well ?
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:06:20 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>>
>>> Why don't you set the connection factory directly on the camel-jms URI ?
>>>
>>> For instance: >> uri="jms:queue:foo?connectionFactory=#jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> On 18/06/2019 16:02, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>>>
>>> well, I am using them as:
>>>
>>> >> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
>>> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)"
>>> availability="mandatory" />
>>> >> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
>>> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)"
>>> availability="mandatory" />
>>>
>>> >> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>>> >> ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
>>> 
>>>
>>> >> class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>>> >> ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
>>> 
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:59:28 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> wrote:

 If you have two ConnectionFactory services, maybe you use only one
 service, that would explain why you only have one connection (with one
 producer and one consumer).

 Regards
 JB
 On 18/06/2019 15:52, Kushal Gautam wrote:

 Hi:

 ok. that's what I thought.

 So, here is my scenario. I have 4 karaf instances, and each instance
 has two pax-jms configurations(one for producer and one for consumer). But,
 in the connections tab, I see just one connection per instance. Is this a
 normal behavior? Because, I have two pax-jms configs and shldn't they have
 two connections per instance, in this case? I have to verify this thing
 with my previous implementation (while deploying broker as an artifact).

 Regards,
 Cooshal.

 On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:45:41 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
 wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> That's the way JMS works.
>
> You create a ConnectionFactory. The connection factory provides
> connections.
>
> A connection provides several sessions. A session is single threaded,
> and "assigned" to an action (consume or produce).
>
> So, inside a single connection (for one client), you can have bunch of
> sessions (some producing, some consuming). In Camel, you can define the
> number of sessions per connection.
>
> For consuming, you can use the receive() method or a MessageListener.
> The session is also where you define the ACK mode (AUTO, CLIENT, DUPS,
> TRANSACTED).
>
> If you need more details, don't hesitate to ping me directly ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
> On 18/06/2019 15:31, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>
> Hi again:
>
> I have a query on this issue.
>
> From the connections tab in the activemq webconsle, I see that my
> hundreds of connections are reduced to very few connections. That helped 
> me
> resolve some jms-error issues, where my packets were being dropped because
> my broker was overloaded.
>
> When I look at the details of the connection, I see multiple consumer
> sessions.
>
> I am not able to comprehend the working method of this. Are all these
> sessions using just one connection??
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
>
> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:10:28 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> Hmm
>>
>> You wrote two 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Kushal Gautam]

I am using it like this:

from("eai-consumer:queue:foo.xx.yy") 
...
...

Is there a performance lag for this as well ?


On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 4:06:20 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> Why don't you set the connection factory directly on the camel-jms URI ?
>
> For instance:  uri="jms:queue:foo?connectionFactory=#jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
>
> Regards
> JB
> On 18/06/2019 16:02, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>
> well, I am using them as: 
>
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)" 
> availability="mandatory" />
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" 
> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)" 
> availability="mandatory" />
> 
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>  ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
> 
> 
>  class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>  ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
> 
>
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:59:28 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: 
>>
>> If you have two ConnectionFactory services, maybe you use only one 
>> service, that would explain why you only have one connection (with one 
>> producer and one consumer).
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>> On 18/06/2019 15:52, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>>
>> Hi: 
>>
>> ok. that's what I thought.
>>
>> So, here is my scenario. I have 4 karaf instances, and each instance has 
>> two pax-jms configurations(one for producer and one for consumer). But, in 
>> the connections tab, I see just one connection per instance. Is this a 
>> normal behavior? Because, I have two pax-jms configs and shldn't they have 
>> two connections per instance, in this case? I have to verify this thing 
>> with my previous implementation (while deploying broker as an artifact).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:45:41 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote: 
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> That's the way JMS works.
>>>
>>> You create a ConnectionFactory. The connection factory provides 
>>> connections.
>>>
>>> A connection provides several sessions. A session is single threaded, 
>>> and "assigned" to an action (consume or produce).
>>>
>>> So, inside a single connection (for one client), you can have bunch of 
>>> sessions (some producing, some consuming). In Camel, you can define the 
>>> number of sessions per connection.
>>>
>>> For consuming, you can use the receive() method or a MessageListener. 
>>> The session is also where you define the ACK mode (AUTO, CLIENT, DUPS, 
>>> TRANSACTED).
>>>
>>> If you need more details, don't hesitate to ping me directly ;)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> On 18/06/2019 15:31, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi again: 
>>>
>>> I have a query on this issue.
>>>
>>> From the connections tab in the activemq webconsle, I see that my 
>>> hundreds of connections are reduced to very few connections. That helped me 
>>> resolve some jms-error issues, where my packets were being dropped because 
>>> my broker was overloaded.
>>>
>>> When I look at the details of the connection, I see multiple consumer 
>>> sessions. 
>>>
>>> I am not able to comprehend the working method of this. Are all these 
>>> sessions using just one connection??
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Cooshal.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:10:28 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote: 

 Hello

 Hmm

 You wrote two similar blueprint files containing:

 >>> class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
 
 
 
 

 Having etc/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer.cfg doesn't affect your 
 ActiveMQCOnnectionFactory + 
 org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans...

 With pax-jms, you should expose underlying connection 
 javax.jms.ConnectionFactory OSGi service (ActiveMQConnectionFactory) 
 without org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory.

 Probably with pax-jms you have 3 layers: pooled-jms → 
 PooledConnectionFactory → ActiveMQConnectionFactory.

 Now you don't need org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory 
 beans.

 regards
 Grzegorz Grzybek


 pon., 17 cze 2019 o 13:05 Kushal Gautam  
 napisał(a):

> Hi: 
>
> this was my previous config:
>
> 
> http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0;
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance;
> xmlns:cm="
> http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0;
> xsi:schemaLocation="
> http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0 
> https://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0/blueprint.xsd
> 
> http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0 
> http://aries.apache.org/schemas/blueprint-cm/blueprint-cm-1.3.0.xsd
> ">
> 
>  update-strategy="reload" >
> 
> 
>

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Why don't you set the connection factory directly on the camel-jms URI ?

For instance: 

Regards
JB

On 18/06/2019 16:02, Kushal Gautam wrote:
> well, I am using them as:
>
>  interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory"
> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.consumer)"
> availability="mandatory" />
>      interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory"
> filter="(osgi.jndi.service.name=jms/eai.producer)"
> availability="mandatory" />
>     
>      class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>          ref="jmsConsumerConnectionFactory"/>
>     
>     
>      class="org.apache.camel.component.jms.JmsComponent">
>          ref="jmsProducerConnectionFactory"/>
>     
>
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:59:28 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
>
> If you have two ConnectionFactory services, maybe you use only one
> service, that would explain why you only have one connection (with
> one producer and one consumer).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 18/06/2019 15:52, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>> Hi:
>>
>> ok. that's what I thought.
>>
>> So, here is my scenario. I have 4 karaf instances, and each
>> instance has two pax-jms configurations(one for producer and one
>> for consumer). But, in the connections tab, I see just one
>> connection per instance. Is this a normal behavior? Because, I
>> have two pax-jms configs and shldn't they have two connections
>> per instance, in this case? I have to verify this thing with my
>> previous implementation (while deploying broker as an artifact).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:45:41 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste
>> Onofré wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> That's the way JMS works.
>>
>> You create a ConnectionFactory. The connection factory
>> provides connections.
>>
>> A connection provides several sessions. A session is single
>> threaded, and "assigned" to an action (consume or produce).
>>
>> So, inside a single connection (for one client), you can have
>> bunch of sessions (some producing, some consuming). In Camel,
>> you can define the number of sessions per connection.
>>
>> For consuming, you can use the receive() method or a
>> MessageListener. The session is also where you define the ACK
>> mode (AUTO, CLIENT, DUPS, TRANSACTED).
>>
>> If you need more details, don't hesitate to ping me directly ;)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 18/06/2019 15:31, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>>> Hi again:
>>>
>>> I have a query on this issue.
>>>
>>> From the connections tab in the activemq webconsle, I see
>>> that my hundreds of connections are reduced to very few
>>> connections. That helped me resolve some jms-error issues,
>>> where my packets were being dropped because my broker was
>>> overloaded.
>>>
>>> When I look at the details of the connection, I see multiple
>>> consumer sessions. 
>>>
>>> I am not able to comprehend the working method of this. Are
>>> all these sessions using just one connection??
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Cooshal.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:10:28 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz
>>> Grzybek wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> Hmm
>>>
>>> You wrote two similar blueprint files containing:
>>>
>>>     >> class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>>>         
>>>         
>>>         
>>>     
>>>
>>> Having etc/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer.cfg
>>> doesn't affect your ActiveMQCOnnectionFactory +
>>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans...
>>>
>>> With pax-jms, you should expose underlying connection
>>> javax.jms.ConnectionFactory OSGi service
>>> (ActiveMQConnectionFactory) without
>>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory.
>>>
>>> Probably with pax-jms you have 3 layers: pooled-jms →
>>> PooledConnectionFactory → ActiveMQConnectionFactory.
>>>
>>> Now you don't need
>>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans.
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>>
>>>
>>> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 13:05 Kushal Gautam
>>>  napisał(a):
>>>
>>> Hi:
>>>
>>> this was my previous config:
>>>
>>> 
>>> >> xmlns="http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0
>>> "
>>>            
>>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance
>>> "
>>>            
>>> 
>>> 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Kushal Gautam]

well, I am using them as:












On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:59:28 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
> If you have two ConnectionFactory services, maybe you use only one 
> service, that would explain why you only have one connection (with one 
> producer and one consumer).
>
> Regards
> JB
> On 18/06/2019 15:52, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>
> Hi: 
>
> ok. that's what I thought.
>
> So, here is my scenario. I have 4 karaf instances, and each instance has 
> two pax-jms configurations(one for producer and one for consumer). But, in 
> the connections tab, I see just one connection per instance. Is this a 
> normal behavior? Because, I have two pax-jms configs and shldn't they have 
> two connections per instance, in this case? I have to verify this thing 
> with my previous implementation (while deploying broker as an artifact).
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:45:41 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: 
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> That's the way JMS works.
>>
>> You create a ConnectionFactory. The connection factory provides 
>> connections.
>>
>> A connection provides several sessions. A session is single threaded, and 
>> "assigned" to an action (consume or produce).
>>
>> So, inside a single connection (for one client), you can have bunch of 
>> sessions (some producing, some consuming). In Camel, you can define the 
>> number of sessions per connection.
>>
>> For consuming, you can use the receive() method or a MessageListener. The 
>> session is also where you define the ACK mode (AUTO, CLIENT, DUPS, 
>> TRANSACTED).
>>
>> If you need more details, don't hesitate to ping me directly ;)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>> On 18/06/2019 15:31, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>>
>> Hi again: 
>>
>> I have a query on this issue.
>>
>> From the connections tab in the activemq webconsle, I see that my 
>> hundreds of connections are reduced to very few connections. That helped me 
>> resolve some jms-error issues, where my packets were being dropped because 
>> my broker was overloaded.
>>
>> When I look at the details of the connection, I see multiple consumer 
>> sessions. 
>>
>> I am not able to comprehend the working method of this. Are all these 
>> sessions using just one connection??
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>>
>> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:10:28 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote: 
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> Hmm
>>>
>>> You wrote two similar blueprint files containing:
>>>
>>> >> class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> Having etc/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer.cfg doesn't affect your 
>>> ActiveMQCOnnectionFactory + 
>>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans...
>>>
>>> With pax-jms, you should expose underlying connection 
>>> javax.jms.ConnectionFactory OSGi service (ActiveMQConnectionFactory) 
>>> without org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory.
>>>
>>> Probably with pax-jms you have 3 layers: pooled-jms → 
>>> PooledConnectionFactory → ActiveMQConnectionFactory.
>>>
>>> Now you don't need org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory 
>>> beans.
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>>
>>>
>>> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 13:05 Kushal Gautam  
>>> napisał(a):
>>>
 Hi: 

 this was my previous config:

 
 http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0;
 xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance;
 xmlns:cm="
 http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0;
 xsi:schemaLocation="
 http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0 
 https://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0/blueprint.xsd
 
 http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0 
 http://aries.apache.org/schemas/blueprint-cm/blueprint-cm-1.3.0.xsd
 ">
 
 >>> update-strategy="reload" >
 
 
 
 
 
 >>> />
 >>> />
 
   

 >>> class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
 
 
 
 

 >>> class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
 
 >>> ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
 
 
 >>> class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
 
 >>> ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
 

 >>> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
 
 
 >>> value="${PRODUCER_JNDI_NAME}" />
 
 
 
 >>> interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
 
 
 >>> value="${CONSUMER_JNDI_NAME}" />
 
 

 

 I will try to see if I can get the stack trace. This problem is 
 currently there in the 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

If you have two ConnectionFactory services, maybe you use only one
service, that would explain why you only have one connection (with one
producer and one consumer).

Regards
JB

On 18/06/2019 15:52, Kushal Gautam wrote:
> Hi:
>
> ok. that's what I thought.
>
> So, here is my scenario. I have 4 karaf instances, and each instance
> has two pax-jms configurations(one for producer and one for consumer).
> But, in the connections tab, I see just one connection per instance.
> Is this a normal behavior? Because, I have two pax-jms configs and
> shldn't they have two connections per instance, in this case? I have
> to verify this thing with my previous implementation (while deploying
> broker as an artifact).
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 3:45:41 PM UTC+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> That's the way JMS works.
>
> You create a ConnectionFactory. The connection factory provides
> connections.
>
> A connection provides several sessions. A session is single
> threaded, and "assigned" to an action (consume or produce).
>
> So, inside a single connection (for one client), you can have
> bunch of sessions (some producing, some consuming). In Camel, you
> can define the number of sessions per connection.
>
> For consuming, you can use the receive() method or a
> MessageListener. The session is also where you define the ACK mode
> (AUTO, CLIENT, DUPS, TRANSACTED).
>
> If you need more details, don't hesitate to ping me directly ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 18/06/2019 15:31, Kushal Gautam wrote:
>> Hi again:
>>
>> I have a query on this issue.
>>
>> From the connections tab in the activemq webconsle, I see that my
>> hundreds of connections are reduced to very few connections. That
>> helped me resolve some jms-error issues, where my packets were
>> being dropped because my broker was overloaded.
>>
>> When I look at the details of the connection, I see multiple
>> consumer sessions. 
>>
>> I am not able to comprehend the working method of this. Are all
>> these sessions using just one connection??
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>>
>> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:10:28 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> Hmm
>>
>> You wrote two similar blueprint files containing:
>>
>>     > class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>>         
>>         
>>         
>>     
>>
>> Having etc/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer.cfg doesn't
>> affect your ActiveMQCOnnectionFactory +
>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans...
>>
>> With pax-jms, you should expose underlying connection
>> javax.jms.ConnectionFactory OSGi service
>> (ActiveMQConnectionFactory) without
>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory.
>>
>> Probably with pax-jms you have 3 layers: pooled-jms →
>> PooledConnectionFactory → ActiveMQConnectionFactory.
>>
>> Now you don't need
>> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans.
>>
>> regards
>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>
>>
>> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 13:05 Kushal Gautam 
>> napisał(a):
>>
>> Hi:
>>
>> this was my previous config:
>>
>> 
>> > xmlns="http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0
>> "
>>            
>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance
>> "
>>            
>> 
>> xmlns:cm="http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0
>> "
>>             xsi:schemaLocation="
>>              
>>   http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0
>>  
>> https://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0/blueprint.xsd
>> 
>>              
>>   http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0
>>  
>> http://aries.apache.org/schemas/blueprint-cm/blueprint-cm-1.3.0.xsd
>> 
>> 
>>             ">
>>     
>>     > persistent-id="prs-eai-broker" update-strategy="reload" >
>>         
>>             > value="tcp://localhost:61616" />
>>             
>>             
>>             
>>             > value="jms/producer" />
>>          

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi,

That's the way JMS works.

You create a ConnectionFactory. The connection factory provides connections.

A connection provides several sessions. A session is single threaded,
and "assigned" to an action (consume or produce).

So, inside a single connection (for one client), you can have bunch of
sessions (some producing, some consuming). In Camel, you can define the
number of sessions per connection.

For consuming, you can use the receive() method or a MessageListener.
The session is also where you define the ACK mode (AUTO, CLIENT, DUPS,
TRANSACTED).

If you need more details, don't hesitate to ping me directly ;)

Regards
JB

On 18/06/2019 15:31, Kushal Gautam wrote:
> Hi again:
>
> I have a query on this issue.
>
> From the connections tab in the activemq webconsle, I see that my
> hundreds of connections are reduced to very few connections. That
> helped me resolve some jms-error issues, where my packets were being
> dropped because my broker was overloaded.
>
> When I look at the details of the connection, I see multiple consumer
> sessions. 
>
> I am not able to comprehend the working method of this. Are all these
> sessions using just one connection??
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
>
> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:10:28 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> Hmm
>
> You wrote two similar blueprint files containing:
>
>      class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>         
>         
>         
>     
>
> Having etc/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer.cfg doesn't affect
> your ActiveMQCOnnectionFactory +
> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans...
>
> With pax-jms, you should expose underlying connection
> javax.jms.ConnectionFactory OSGi service
> (ActiveMQConnectionFactory) without
> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory.
>
> Probably with pax-jms you have 3 layers: pooled-jms →
> PooledConnectionFactory → ActiveMQConnectionFactory.
>
> Now you don't need
> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans.
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
>
> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 13:05 Kushal Gautam  > napisał(a):
>
> Hi:
>
> this was my previous config:
>
> 
> http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0
> "
>            
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance
> "
>            
> xmlns:cm="http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0
> "
>             xsi:schemaLocation="
>                 http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0
>  
> https://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0/blueprint.xsd
> 
>              
>   http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0
>  
> http://aries.apache.org/schemas/blueprint-cm/blueprint-cm-1.3.0.xsd
> 
>             ">
>     
>      update-strategy="reload" >
>         
>              value="tcp://localhost:61616" />
>             
>             
>             
>              value="jms/producer" />
>              value="jms/consumer" />
>         
>       
>
>      class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>         
>         
>         
>     
>
>      class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
>          value="${MAX_CONNECTIONS}" />
>          ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
>     
>     
>      class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
>          value="${MAX_CONNECTIONS}" />
>          ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
>     
>
>      interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
>         
>             
>             http://osgi.jndi.service.name/>" value="${PRODUCER_JNDI_NAME}" />
>         
>     
>     
>      interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
>         
>             
>             http://osgi.jndi.service.name/>" value="${CONSUMER_JNDI_NAME}" />
>         
>     
>
> 
>
> I will try to see if I can get the stack trace. This problem
> is currently there in the prod. system. So, I have to check
> that once.
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
> 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Kushal Gautam]

Hi again:

I have a query on this issue.

>From the connections tab in the activemq webconsle, I see that my hundreds 
of connections are reduced to very few connections. That helped me resolve 
some jms-error issues, where my packets were being dropped because my 
broker was overloaded.

When I look at the details of the connection, I see multiple consumer 
sessions. 

I am not able to comprehend the working method of this. Are all these 
sessions using just one connection??

Regards,
Cooshal.


On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:10:28 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> Hmm
>
> You wrote two similar blueprint files containing:
>
>  class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> Having etc/org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer.cfg doesn't affect your 
> ActiveMQCOnnectionFactory + 
> org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans...
>
> With pax-jms, you should expose underlying connection 
> javax.jms.ConnectionFactory OSGi service (ActiveMQConnectionFactory) 
> without org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory.
>
> Probably with pax-jms you have 3 layers: pooled-jms → 
> PooledConnectionFactory → ActiveMQConnectionFactory.
>
> Now you don't need org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory beans.
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
>
> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 13:05 Kushal Gautam > 
> napisał(a):
>
>> Hi:
>>
>> this was my previous config:
>>
>> 
>> http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0;
>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance;
>> xmlns:cm="
>> http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0;
>> xsi:schemaLocation="
>> http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0 
>> https://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0/blueprint.xsd
>> 
>> http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0 
>> http://aries.apache.org/schemas/blueprint-cm/blueprint-cm-1.3.0.xsd
>> ">
>> 
>> > update-strategy="reload" >
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   
>>
>> > class="org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> > class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> > ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
>> 
>> 
>> > class="org.apache.activemq.pool.PooledConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> > ref="activemqConnectionFactory" />
>> 
>>
>> > interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> 
>> > value="${PRODUCER_JNDI_NAME}" />
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory">
>> 
>> 
>> > value="${CONSUMER_JNDI_NAME}" />
>> 
>> 
>>
>> 
>>
>> I will try to see if I can get the stack trace. This problem is currently 
>> there in the prod. system. So, I have to check that once.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 12:20:52 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> What was your previous configuration? Is there a chance to get a stack 
>>> trace from under the debugger in the place where message is put into queue?
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>>
>>> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 12:11 Kushal Gautam  
>>> napisał(a):
>>>
 Currently, I am observing some lag in putting the messages in one of 
 the queues. Roughly, the number is about 1-4 messages per second. And, 
 this 
 is way too slow than my previous configuration.

 I checked this from the activemq console.

 I will try to see if I can produce some performance metrics. But, the 
 thing is that I observed the enqueue/dequeue rates to be extremely slow.

 Regards,
 Cooshal.

 On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 11:02:40 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> What kind of processing performance problems do you have? pax-jms 
> doesn't add any special processing - it only deals with exposing 
> connection 
> factories to your beans/components/services/...
>
> PooledJMS itself MAY add some processing overhead, but it of course 
> depends on its configuration. After your application calls 
> javax.jms.ConnectionFactory.getConnection(), it's all up to 
> you/camel-jms/spring-jms how to use/cache/not-cache it...
>
> I'm interested in some numbers, logs maybe - how did you find out that 
> the performance is worse?
>
> thanks in advance for any help/feedback
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 10:57 Kushal Gautam  
> napisał(a):
>
>> Hi:
>>
>> I am using Camel with Karaf, and ActiveMQ
>>
>> Before using pax-jms, I was providing connectionfactories as 
>> artifact. But, since it was not configurable, I planned to switch it to 
>> pax-jms.
>>
>> But, so 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Kushal Gautam]

Hi:

this was my previous config:


http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0;
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance;
xmlns:cm="
http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0;
xsi:schemaLocation="
http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0 
https://www.osgi.org/xmlns/blueprint/v1.0.0/blueprint.xsd
http://aries.apache.org/blueprint/xmlns/blueprint-cm/v1.3.0 
http://aries.apache.org/schemas/blueprint-cm/blueprint-cm-1.3.0.xsd
">










  

































I will try to see if I can get the stack trace. This problem is currently 
there in the prod. system. So, I have to check that once.

Regards,
Cooshal.

On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 12:20:52 PM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> What was your previous configuration? Is there a chance to get a stack 
> trace from under the debugger in the place where message is put into queue?
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 12:11 Kushal Gautam > 
> napisał(a):
>
>> Currently, I am observing some lag in putting the messages in one of the 
>> queues. Roughly, the number is about 1-4 messages per second. And, this is 
>> way too slow than my previous configuration.
>>
>> I checked this from the activemq console.
>>
>> I will try to see if I can produce some performance metrics. But, the 
>> thing is that I observed the enqueue/dequeue rates to be extremely slow.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cooshal.
>>
>> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 11:02:40 AM UTC+2, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> What kind of processing performance problems do you have? pax-jms 
>>> doesn't add any special processing - it only deals with exposing connection 
>>> factories to your beans/components/services/...
>>>
>>> PooledJMS itself MAY add some processing overhead, but it of course 
>>> depends on its configuration. After your application calls 
>>> javax.jms.ConnectionFactory.getConnection(), it's all up to 
>>> you/camel-jms/spring-jms how to use/cache/not-cache it...
>>>
>>> I'm interested in some numbers, logs maybe - how did you find out that 
>>> the performance is worse?
>>>
>>> thanks in advance for any help/feedback
>>> regards
>>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>>
>>> pon., 17 cze 2019 o 10:57 Kushal Gautam  
>>> napisał(a):
>>>
 Hi:

 I am using Camel with Karaf, and ActiveMQ

 Before using pax-jms, I was providing connectionfactories as artifact. 
 But, since it was not configurable, I planned to switch it to pax-jms.

 But, so far, after switching to pax-jms, I have noticed performance lag 
 in message processing. I am not entirely sure, if this is due to pax-jms. 

 Thus, in general, does pax-jms degrade the message processing 
 performance at all?

 For example, my jms-config looks like:

 name = eai-producer
 jms.url = tcp://localhost:61616
 jms.username = system
 jms.password = manager
 type = activemq
 pool = pooledjms
 osgi.jndi.service.name = jms/producer
 org.apache.karaf.features.configKey = 
 org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer

 Regards,
 Cooshal.

 -- 
 -- 
 --
 OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - op...@googlegroups.com

 --- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
 Groups "OPS4J" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
 an email to op...@googlegroups.com.
 To view this discussion on the web visit 
 https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ops4j/dc425a85-23d9-4f47-a855-9d9d96a70689%40googlegroups.com
  
 
 .
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

>>> -- 
>> -- 
>> --
>> OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - op...@googlegroups.com 
>>
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "OPS4J" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to op...@googlegroups.com .
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ops4j/3c8d060e-8f7b-4c47-aee3-1b955d217aef%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>

-- 
-- 
--
OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - ops4j@googlegroups.com

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the 

Re: Does pax-jms degrade the overall performance?

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

Hello

What kind of processing performance problems do you have? pax-jms doesn't
add any special processing - it only deals with exposing connection
factories to your beans/components/services/...

PooledJMS itself MAY add some processing overhead, but it of course depends
on its configuration. After your application calls
javax.jms.ConnectionFactory.getConnection(), it's all up to
you/camel-jms/spring-jms how to use/cache/not-cache it...

I'm interested in some numbers, logs maybe - how did you find out that the
performance is worse?

thanks in advance for any help/feedback
regards
Grzegorz Grzybek

pon., 17 cze 2019 o 10:57 Kushal Gautam 
napisał(a):

> Hi:
>
> I am using Camel with Karaf, and ActiveMQ
>
> Before using pax-jms, I was providing connectionfactories as artifact.
> But, since it was not configurable, I planned to switch it to pax-jms.
>
> But, so far, after switching to pax-jms, I have noticed performance lag in
> message processing. I am not entirely sure, if this is due to pax-jms.
>
> Thus, in general, does pax-jms degrade the message processing performance
> at all?
>
> For example, my jms-config looks like:
>
> name = eai-producer
> jms.url = tcp://localhost:61616
> jms.username = system
> jms.password = manager
> type = activemq
> pool = pooledjms
> osgi.jndi.service.name = jms/producer
> org.apache.karaf.features.configKey = org.ops4j.connectionfactory-producer
>
> Regards,
> Cooshal.
>
> --
> --
> --
> OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - ops4j@googlegroups.com
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OPS4J" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to ops4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ops4j/dc425a85-23d9-4f47-a855-9d9d96a70689%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
--
OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - ops4j@googlegroups.com

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OPS4J" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ops4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ops4j/CAAdXmhrQ_k1saqhq39fbvJVt6tvJ7%3DMaWP-ExoiMe3_K3n1EMA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.