on the results of your jprobe profiling, it would be good to identify if there is a real contention problem there. If you can generate a simple junit test case that demonstrates the behavior you are seeing, please open a jira issue and we can investigate some more. A test case will help focus the analysis.
On 12 September 2011 01:08, bbansal <bhup...@groupon.com> wrote: > Hello folks, > > I am evaluating ActiveMQ for some simple scenarios. The web-server will push > notifications to the queue/topic to be consumed by one or many consumers. > The one requirement is web-server should not get impacted or should be able > to write at their speed even if consumers goes down etc. > > ActiveMQ is performing very well with about 1500 QPS (8 producer thread, > persistence, kaha-db) Kahadb parameters being used are > > enableJournalDiskSyncs="false" indexWriteBatchSize="1000" > enableIndexWriteAsync="true > > The system works great if consumers are all caught up, the issue is when I > am trying to test scenarios with backlogged data (keep running producer for > 30 mins or so) and then start consumers. Consumer show good consumption rate > but the producers (8 threads same as before) cannot do more than 120 QPS. > This is a drop of more than 90% degradation. > > I ran profiler on the code (Jprofiler) and looks like the writers are > getting stuck for write locks while competing with the removeAsyncMessages() > or call to clear messages which got acknowledged from clients etc. > > I saw similar complaints for some other folks, Is there some settings we can > use to fix the problem ? I dont want to degrade any guarantee level (eg. > disable acks etc). > > Would be more than happy to run experiments with different settings if folks > have some suggestions. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Backlog-data-causes-producers-to-slow-down-tp3806018p3806018.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- http://fusesource.com http://blog.garytully.com
