Hi Flavio, a few questions so we can help investigate your issue:
are you using the Java or the C++ broker? how are you creating the 100k topics/queues? when you run your test is it obvious whether the broker or the client is the bottleneck - e.g. is one of these using significantly more CPU time than the other? would it be possible to provide for you to provide your test code so that we can try to replicate the issue (e.g. by attaching to a JIRA)? thanks, Rob On 8 November 2013 12:18, Flavio Baronti <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > I have an use case where I need to create hundreds of thousands of queues, > each one subscribed to a different topic (therefore I have as many topics > as queues). > I set up a test with a single producer generating data on a randomly > chosen topic, and a receiver retrieving data from the queues (and throwing > it away). > > I'm using the JMS api, and doing the obvious thing makes the throughput > drop dramatically from 10k msg/sec with a single topic/queue (around the > top my network adapter can sustain) to 20 msg/sec with 100k topics/queues. > I found out that I can recover performance by using more JMS sessions and > connections - e.g. create 4 connections with 100 sessions each, and > randomly distributing the receiving queues on them. > This however is less than ideal, since with the JMS client a thread is > created for each session, and I definitely don't want 400 threads receiving > data. The work I have to do is CPU-bound, and I don't want to waste time in > context switching when 2/4 threads can suffice. > > Why does the throughput drop so badly with many topics/queues? Why adding > sessions helps? Am I overlooking something, or doing something wrong? > > Thanks > Flavio > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
