On 07/22/2012 06:33 PM, Virgilio Fornazin wrote:
We use MRG-M here too, and we are running in trouble sometimes with this
confuse flow-to-disk implementation.
What we expect to have, to replace it, it's something like a real
'queue-on-disk' with parameters like current
implementation of flow-to-disk have (max messages/bytes on memory, max
messages/bytes on disk file, etc).
I think this is the right way to think about it. What we have is a
store that is optimized for journaling (write-only) performance to
support message persistence. Flow-to-disk is a completely different use
case and should be implemented as a separate feature. The primary
design goal should be to have a memory footprint that is not correlated
to the queue size.
-Ted
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
