On 06/17/2016 06:16 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
Just wanted to share some positive feedback we got from a customer.
I wrote some time go about a problem we had at a customer that
activemq failover took too long.
In the end the problem was the sheer amount of data in the kahadb
journals.
We found that most of the long term queued data was in some DLQs. In a
single kahadb this DLQ contents were very scarcely scattered in the
kahadb journals.
So most journals just contained some kb of still active messages but
still consumed the whole space.
This lead to a kahadb size of about 34GB. We then decided to switch to
mkahadb with one kahadb per queue. As now the DLQs were isolated the
messages were packaed much more densely.
After migrating the production we got feedback from the customer that
the kahadb size went down to just about 50MB. This of course also
removed the big failover times.
So I can very much recommend to use mkahadb for such scenarios.
Christian
Great, thanks for the feedback
--
Tim Bish
twitter: @tabish121
blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
