Use the fc-fast protocol; I tested this on my home system, and got about 1600 msgs/sec.
fc-fast uses flow control, so it is very good when having *sustained* load over an
extended period of time. But I'm sure you could optimize even more if you know the
type of app (which you do).
Bela
a
I tried the bare-bones.xml file for jgroups - it doesn't work for sljms. I get the
following:
[java] WARN 10:18:16,964 [main] (Trace.java:387) - fetching state will fail as state
transfer is not supported. Add one of the STATE_TRANSFER protocols to your protocol
specification
a
anonymous wrote :
| Use the fc-fast protocol; I tested this on my home system, and got about 1600
msgs/sec.
| fc-fast uses flow control, so it is very good when having *sustained* load over an
extended period of time. But I'm sure you could optimize even more if you know the
type of app
I just tried a quick test with just text messages with the fc-fast.xml.
Messages/second decrease with each subscriber. This seems counter-intuitive to using
multicast. It's behaving like TCP. Am I the only one seeing this?
a
bela wrote : [
| I wasn't aware Ovidiu has added ObjectMsg support yet. Are you using serialization
or externalization ? You mentioned you have ca 1-2K worth of data/msg ?
| Bela
I implemented it myself just to get things running locally with my copy. There may be
a more optimal way of
bela wrote : [
|
| Hmm, it takes a bit of experimenting with this. Ovidiu, do you want to do it ?
|
| Regarding state transfer: just add STATE_TRANSFER on top of your bare bones stack
(copy the tag from, say, fc-fast.xml).
|
|
If I add that then it complains of another
bela wrote :
| Use of Serializable will probably be removed from MessageImpl (replaced by
Externalizable, if possible). Serialization will exert some penalty, but what numbers
did you get anyway for the pubsub test ? I'm also curious about HW/SW/JDK/NW.
|
Here are my numbers:
HW - Dell
bela wrote :
| I see. Maybe hold off a bit more, until Ovidiu has experimented with it some more;
he does have JGroups knowledge. So how important is the bare-bones stack to you right
now ? Can you live with fc-fast.xml for now (of course, after you get 1000 msgs/sec) ?
|
If I got 1000
I implemented the ObjectMessage (simple enough) just so I could run some tests. Is it
possible to change the protocol stack for optimization and do the minimal
configuration to increase performance? Every time I take out a protol on the stack it
seems to complain. The JGroups documentation
I guess another way of posing my question would be. If I didn't care about
reliability and only about performance, how would I configure these protocol stacks
with the optimal configuration? What is the bare bones required?
a
If describing my data may help with optimizing the protocol stack...
I'm primarily sending radar state information. Just for a rough estimate, I
serialized the objects to a file (I know this isn't the most accurate way of getting
the true size of the objects) but they range from 1.3kb - 2.0kb
I have not bridged between protocol stacks yet. I was planning on doing so for
firewall traversal but haven't reached that point yet. I'd like to get some good
numbers with the closest thing to pure multicast right now and then move from there.
a
It appears one can't send objects over the sljms implementation. Are there plans to
add this soon? I only see text messages right now. Is this something trivial to
implement?
a
href=http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3827154#3827154;View
the original post/a
a
Ovidiuf,
Thank you for the good documentation and the new version of the serverless JMS. I
am anxious to work with this new code base this week.
If I may inquire, I'd like to know if you would be willing to receive code
contributions? We can talk about this offline if that's appropriate?
Will the new version 0.2 be released today or some time next week? Perhaps it's
already been released and I don't know where to look to get it?
a
href=http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3826527#3826527;View
the original post/a
a
Sounds great! I look forward to trying this out next week. If you could give me some
instructions on how/where to get the 0.2 when you release it, I would appreciate it.
Thanks.
a
href=http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3825509#3825509;View
the original post/a
a
Is there some date in mind for releasing a non-beta version? I'm assuming 0.2 still
means in the beta stage? Thanks.
a
href=http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3825243#3825243;View
the original post/a
a
So let me ask you this...
Is it currently possible to send that JMS through a firewall? Can I send it multicast
and rebroadcast unicast and vice versa or is that impossible in the 0.2? Would there
be a significant development effort to do this?
Here's what I'm thinking and perhaps what I
Thanks for the quick reply. What can I expect in this new implementation? Will true
hardware multicast be available with the JMS? When can I expect an officially stable
release?
Am I currently multicasting with that old version? Can I get some documentation?
a
In an attempt to create a multicast publish/subscribe topic, I followed the code
example at http://www.jboss.org/developers/projects/jboss/jms/documentation/pure-p2p
I'm getting really inconsistent results running a simple producer and consumer.
Sometimes my consumer never receives any
Nevermind. Looks like the Synch client was what I wanted. However, I'm still
wondering if I'm using multicast or not. This GMS output with addresses not in the
multicast range lead me to believe I'm not multicasting. Is there some way to turn
this on in the jgroups configuration? Thanks.
21 matches
Mail list logo
