There has been numerous fixes and improves for leveldb on the 5.10 branch. So you may want to try building from latest source code and try with a SNAPSHOT of 5.10.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Oleg Dulin <oleg.du...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am running a similar test. > > Replicated LevelDB, 3 Zookepers, 3 AMQ brokers with local_mem sync, I am > publishing messages on a queue using one thread, and taking them off that > queue on another thread. > > Performance is abysmal, 1700 messages or so go out pretty quick, but then it > pauses every 50 messages or so. > > The settings are mostly taken from the sample Replicated LevelDB > configuration. > > What gives ? > > Any input is greatly appreciated. > > > On 2014-02-14 20:26:41 +0000, shippers said: > >> I'm testing with ActiveMQ Replicated too (latest SNAPSHOT build) and >> seeing >> similar problems with stability and reliability. Performance-wise, it >> depends on the messaging pattern, number of pubs / subs, message size, and >> transaction size. Also, very dependent on network speed and local disk >> speed. >> >> Can you describe your testing env? Size of messages? # of clients pub >> and >> sub? Network speed? >> >> I'm running a 3 node ActiveMQ quorum_mem and 3 node Zookeeper. >> >> Example test, 1 pub and 1 sub client running on different hardware, 4k >> message size, persisted messages, not using transactions, 10G network, >> virtual hardware box of 2 CPUs and 8 GIGs memory. >> >> ~900 msgs/per sec steady state (pub / sub running normally, keeping up >> with >> each other) > > > > -- > Regards, > Oleg Dulin > http://www.olegdulin.com > > -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- Red Hat, Inc. Email: cib...@redhat.com Twitter: davsclaus Blog: http://davsclaus.com Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen Make your Camel applications look hawt, try: http://hawt.io
