On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 18:13 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
> On 30/07/14 09:59, Gordon Sim wrote:
> > On 07/29/2014 09:00 PM, Alan Conway wrote:
> >> Done
> >>
> >>
> >> r1614472 | aconway | 2014-07-29 15:59:19 -0400 (Tue, 29 Jul
On 30/07/14 09:59, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 07/29/2014 09:00 PM, Alan Conway wrote:
Done
r1614472 | aconway | 2014-07-29 15:59:19 -0400 (Tue, 29 Jul 2014) | 2
lines
QPID-5941: Set sensible default build type: default is RelWi
On 07/29/2014 09:00 PM, Alan Conway wrote:
Done
r1614472 | aconway | 2014-07-29 15:59:19 -0400 (Tue, 29 Jul 2014) | 2
lines
QPID-5941: Set sensible default build type: default is RelWithDebInfo.
--
On Mon, 2014-07-28 at 19:17 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
> On 28/07/14 14:29, Alan Conway wrote:
> >
> > Based on discussion so far I am inclined to
> > - make the default build type RelWithDebInfo
> > - udpate cpp/INSTALL discussion of build types (it does mention
> > Release/Debug already, I'll add
On 28/07/14 14:29, Alan Conway wrote:
Based on discussion so far I am inclined to
- make the default build type RelWithDebInfo
- udpate cpp/INSTALL discussion of build types (it does mention
Release/Debug already, I'll add mention of the other types.
We don't have unanimity over Release vs. Rel
On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 02:46 -0400, Pavel Moravec wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> > > >I think that RelWithDebInfo is more generally useful - it gives you
> > > >nearly all the optimisation you want and debugging symbols for when you
> > > >screw up!
> > > >
> >
> > Works for me. Did som
- Original Message -
> > >I think that RelWithDebInfo is more generally useful - it gives you
> > >nearly all the optimisation you want and debugging symbols for when you
> > >screw up!
> > >
>
> Works for me. Did some quick benchmarks and the perf differences between
> Release and RelWi
- Original Message -
> From: "Josh Carlson"
> To: users@qpid.apache.org
> Cc: "Fraser Adams"
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 1:38:04 PM
> Subject: Re: REQEST FEEDBACK Re: How to test the performance quid c++ broker
>
>
> >
> > The onl
The only way I'd feel happy defaulting to a build with debug symbols
or otherwise unstripped is if the build informed the users that this
was the case. I truly believe that the most common use case for an
average user is to want to download, build and enjoy and they should
have a reasonable
Hey 郑勰,
Qpid should definitely be able to achieve at least 200,000 per second,
though it'll depend on the message size and hardware obviously. Check
out the paper linked below:
http://www.redhat.com/f/pdf/mrg/Reference_Architecture_MRG_Messaging_Throughput.pdf
That paper has something like 380,00
> -Original Message-
> From: Fraser Adams [mailto:fraser.ad...@blueyonder.co.uk]
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 1:22 PM
> To: users@qpid.apache.org
> Subject: Re: REQEST FEEDBACK Re: How to test the performance quid c++
> broker
>
> On 25/07/14 17:27, Steve Huston
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 1:13:45 PM
> Subject: Re: REQEST FEEDBACK Re: How to test the performance quid c++ broker
>
> On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 12:13 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 16:47 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
> > > ...
> > > My vote would b
On 25/07/14 17:27, Steve Huston wrote:
I believe that the person likely to be downloading qpid source is a
developer. It is likely a developer that does not want to become
intimately familiar with debugging Qpid - they just want it to work
without asking questions. But it is a person who may nee
On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 12:13 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 16:47 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
> > ...
> > My vote would be to default to the most optimised/operational-quality
I agree with this, but I strongly believe that operational-quality
includes debugging symbols.
Operatio
On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 14:48 +, Steve Huston wrote:
> Exactly - I agree with Andrew.
>
> On 7/25/14, 10:46 AM, "Andrew Stitcher" wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 10:30 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
> >> ...
> >> So I vote for making the default build type Release. Someone who finds
> >> performa
On 7/25/14, 12:13 PM, "Alan Conway" wrote:
>On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 16:47 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
>>
>> On 25/07/14 15:30, Alan Conway wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 17:31 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
>> >> On 24/07/14 13:59, Alan Conway wrote:
>> >>> Very important point I forgot to mention
Wow, I didn’t expect a little question would raise a lively discussion.
Truth be told, my boss is inclined not to use quid because of low throughout.
We expect sent messages and received messages should be at least 200,000 per
second.However, I am really trying to convince myself to obtain this
On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 16:47 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
>
> On 25/07/14 15:30, Alan Conway wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 17:31 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
> >> On 24/07/14 13:59, Alan Conway wrote:
> >>> Very important point I forgot to mention: are you doing a release
> >>> build?
> >>>
> >>> cm
On 25/07/14 15:30, Alan Conway wrote:
On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 17:31 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
On 24/07/14 13:59, Alan Conway wrote:
Very important point I forgot to mention: are you doing a release
build?
cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release
That makes a big difference. It enables optimization f
On 07/25/2014 03:46 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote:
On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 10:30 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
...
So I vote for making the default build type Release. Someone who finds
performance sucks is more likely to leave without asking questions than
someone who has trouble with their debugger (and
Exactly - I agree with Andrew.
On 7/25/14, 10:46 AM, "Andrew Stitcher" wrote:
>On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 10:30 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
>> ...
>> So I vote for making the default build type Release. Someone who finds
>> performance sucks is more likely to leave without asking questions than
>> some
On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 10:30 -0400, Alan Conway wrote:
> ...
> So I vote for making the default build type Release. Someone who finds
> performance sucks is more likely to leave without asking questions than
> someone who has trouble with their debugger (and since the default
> doesn't set -g anyway
On 07/25/2014 03:30 PM, Alan Conway wrote:
So I vote for making the default build type Release. Someone who finds
performance sucks is more likely to leave without asking questions than
someone who has trouble with their debugger (and since the default
doesn't set -g anyway that doesn't appear to
On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 17:31 +0100, Fraser Adams wrote:
> On 24/07/14 13:59, Alan Conway wrote:
> >
> > Very important point I forgot to mention: are you doing a release
> > build?
> >
> > cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release
> >
> > That makes a big difference. It enables optimization flags for the C+
24 matches
Mail list logo
