Andy Grove wrote:
Sure. That makes sense. In fact, I'm working on a product/solution where
I'll be using messaging and databases in a transactional way and it's
imperative that the performance of messaging (with persistent messages,
durable subscribers and transactions) is faster than the database
operations. I'm in the process of performance testing a prototype of the
solution and I'll be using QPID M2 and Berkeley DB for now and will see how
the performance looks.
Andy,
few things I can note from the M3 work on AMQP 0-10. AMQP 0-10 allows
for a reliable
publish, thus TX only adds the ability to commit 'sets' of messages, and
DTX adds ACID coordination.
So if all you need is the reliability of the individual messages then
there are gains that can be had. In this
use case I am able to sustain durable rates of 2/3 that of the transient
rate using a SAN. If you are forcing
a TX commit on every message I believe you are no more reliable thus
just using the confirm modes of
AMQP 0-10. However, if you are committing small sets of messages then
are effectively forcing some
head of line blocking.
regards
Carl.
