Jamie,
In general, JMS should not be used for performance reasons but for its richer
properties such as broadcasting and persistence. JMS lies at the very end of the
performance spectrum.
Asynchronous logging can give excellent results in systems doing tons of IO, for
example in an EJB running under a heavily loaded Application Server. Hope this helps,
Ceki
At 15:57 16.07.2001 -0700, Jamie Tsao wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I would like to asynchronously log messages (for performance reasons). I know the
>AsyncAppender is designed for this purpose, but I believe there have been performance
>measures that don't necessary prove the case. I was also thinking that I could use a
>JMSAppender. Now, I know that this is not truly asynchronous, because each logging
>request is not actually performed in a separate thread. But since performance is
>usually degraded due to IO (i.e. writing log to a file), this solution may still be
>somewhat asynchronous. I would have a receiver (working in a separate thread) that
>takes messages off the queue and writes them to a log file (or NT Event log, etc.).
>
>My question is ... is this overkill ? Does anyone have experience with a logging
>system which uses JMS in the manner specified above ? I'm worried that the
>management of messages on the queue might outweight the benefits. Perhaps the
>AsynchAppender is the better/appropriate approach ?
>
>Any ideas ?
--
Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
