>>>You'd better learn how to respect others at first before you ask for more >>>help again.I really feel not very happy for this. How can you say like that? Following your suggestions, I almost trying all the possible parameters what I can figure out. Maybe the parameter and the codes doesn't in normal status because of my revision back and forth. The reason I want more help is the project is urgent and I really have no more time to make deep research.
With and without transaction the performance is different greatly, for same business logic; This is what I see from my testing. OK, forget it! I'll try other open source MOM. Thanks a lot any way, Zhuran Li At 2011-11-30 11:54:07,SuoNayi <suonayi2...@163.com> wrote: >I glanced round your code which is not normative and found that you didnot >follow what I had suggested. >You'd better learn how to respect others at first before you ask for more help >again. > > > >At 2011-11-29 17:07:37,SuoNayi <suonayi2...@163.com> wrote: > >In addition, you may try the following as well: >3,vmCursor will help to increase the performance of consumers but you'd >better enable producerFlowControl if you do not want to get an OOM. >4,for queue enabling optimizedDispatch will be helpful too. >5,consumer with transaction should be faster than that wihtout transaction. >But if you commit the transaction each time consuming a message it will be >slower indeed. >At 2011-11-29 10:21:48,lzr <jsw...@163.com> wrote: > >Here comes more performance test information: >Without transaction, I can perform the flow about 500 times per second. >With transaction, it's only 20 times per second. > > > >At 2011-11-29 09:35:30,lzr <jsw...@163.com> wrote: > >Thanks a lot for your timely response! >I'll try it again following up your advice. >I make further test with transaction and found it gets worse and worse:( >Following are my cases: >Client sends request 1 to queue S1, then wait response 1; >Server1 receives request 1 and sends request 2 to queue S2, then wait response >2; >Server2 receives request 2 and sends response 2 back; >Server1 receives response 2 and sends response 1 back; >Client receives response1 and records , the flow is done. > > > >At 2011-11-28 17:19:46,SuoNayi <suonayi2...@163.com> wrote: > >It takes more than one network trips(1.5 network trip in fact) when a >consumer is created and closed. > >Broker will keep the status of all consumers so your use case may cause broker >overheat. >You may try the following: >1,ensuring only one connection is created and reused it always. > Do not create connection every time when you need create session, producer > or consumer etc. >2,Property named alwaysSessionAsync of ConnectionFactory is set to be >false(default true). > >At 2011-11-28 16:17:10,lzr <jsw...@163.com> wrote: > >MessageConsumer creating and closing frequently! > > > >At 2011-11-28 10:51:12,SuoNayi <suonayi2...@163.com> wrote: > > >Only creating consumers no close? >Note that with sparse match of selector, you may get into the trouble of >dispatching message. > > > >-- > >Wangyin >suonayi2...@163.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
