well said On 5 June 2017 at 12:31, christopher.l.shannon [via ActiveMQ] < ml+s2283324n4727011...@n4.nabble.com> wrote:
> You can't compare Kafka to a JMS type message broker. Kafka is completely > different. > > Kafka is a system that scales horizontally and is essentially a big > write-ahead log and breaks up the topics into partitions across many > servers so they can be scanned concurrently. This allows insane message > rates but the trade off is that the feature set is much less...there are > no > features like message acknowledgement (messages are not deleted, they are > aged off and a client can seek to any point in the log), message > expiration, scheduled messages, transactions (although transaction support > is currently being worked on) etc which offloads a lot of work that a > typical message broker has to do. Kafka clusters can scale to thousands > of nodes and handle millions of messages per second. > > Any standalone broker like ActiveMQ, Artemis, etc is going to be measured > at a rate of thousands per second. > > On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Clebert Suconic <[hidden email] > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4727011&i=0>> > wrote: > > > For the use case you're after. (No hard syncs). Mmap is a good > candidate. > > Probably better. > > > > > > Libaio was engineered the case where you hard sync with callbacks from > the > > Linux os > > On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 12:46 PM wangqinghuan <[hidden email] > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=4727011&i=1>> wrote: > > > > > hi clebertsuconic: > > > i read the blog > > > https://activemq.apache.org/artemis/docs/2.1.0/persistence.html > > > By default Apache ActiveMQ Artemis will try and use an AIO journal.But > it > > > seems like that Mmap is also a good implemention.which one gives more > > > performance? > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > View this message in context: > > > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/why-AvtiveMq-is- > slowly-than-Kafka- > > tp4726911p4726992.html > > > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > -- > > Clebert Suconic > > > > > ------------------------------ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/why-AvtiveMq-is-slowly-than-Kafka- > tp4726911p4727011.html > To start a new topic under ActiveMQ - User, email > ml+s2283324n2341805...@n4.nabble.com > To unsubscribe from ActiveMQ - User, click here > <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=2341805&code=YW5keS50YXlsczY3QGdtYWlsLmNvbXwyMzQxODA1fC05MDE1NDk1MzM=> > . > NAML > <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml> > -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/why-AvtiveMq-is-slowly-than-Kafka-tp4726911p4727048.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
