BTW more background in this thread http://www.nabble.com/JMSPriority-...-tf1754744s2354.html#a4771222
On 2/26/07, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Using selectors is usually a better way of shaping traffic than JMSPriority. On 2/25/07, Stefan Arentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm confused about JMSPriority. My use case is simple: > > I have a bunch of fast servers that need to process slow (1 - 5 > second) jobs. I also have many slow servers for batch processing. All > of these servers take jobs from the same queue. > > The slow servers use a selector like "type == BATCH" so they only take > batch jobs. That works fine. > > The fast servers are not always busy however, so I let them take any > message and then prioritize them based on JMSPriority. The idea here > is that the fast servers can take over some work from the batch > servers when they are idle. That does not seem to work though .. high > priority jobs are simply appended to end of the queue instead of being > scheduled at the beginning. > > This is on 4.1.0. I also tried on 4.2-SNAPSHOT but the behaviour seems > to be the same. > > S. > -- James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
-- James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
