It's always nice to hear stories like this... valeu e Obrigado! :) (sorry for the PT-br... just saying thanks a lot with a personal touch)
On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 7:38 PM Edson Richter <edsonrich...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > We actually run Artemis in production with more than 1.000.000 messages > processed per week (evenly distributted during the 24 hours of the day), in a > VM with 64GB RAM, 16 vCore and 256GB SSD NVME in running in raid mode. > Performance is a quite dificult subject to talk about, because all depends on > where your server run, where your consumers run, what is your hardware, bare > metal or virtual, container or not container, message size, routing rules, > replication rules, protocols, disk controller, disk type and disk size, etc. > In our case, 90% of this 1.000.000 messages have 44 bytes on length, only 10% > are complex json objects. > > Few months ago we had few problems (misbehavior), but they got quickly fixed > by downloading source code and fixing it ourselves creating a custom distro. > Few weeks later, Artemis Team fixed the problem and we returned to the > standard distro. > > > Regards, > > ER. > > > Enviado do Email<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> para Windows > > De: Clebert Suconic<mailto:clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > Enviado:quarta-feira, 28 de setembro de 2022 18:50 > Para: users@activemq.apache.org<mailto:users@activemq.apache.org> > Assunto: Re: Is Artemis Production Ready? > > publishing a benchmark is a game without end. > > > It's always possible to get a particular usecase or tweak things in a > way that will move the benchmark in any direction you want. > > > the best you can do is to measure the use case you want to achieve > yourself. I have spent a lot of time with benchmarks before and I > don't want to get back to that game myself :) > > > Having said that, we have an ./artemis perf client tool as part of the > artemis cli that you can use for some metrics. > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 4:05 AM Francois Papon > <francois.pa...@openobject.fr> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > /"the reporting performance of Artemis is significantly higher than > > Classic"/ > > > > I'm very interested about such of reporting performance between Artemis > > and AMQ. > > > > Is it possible to share? > > > > Regards, > > > > François > > > > > > On 26/09/2022 16:40, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > Couple minor corrections for anyone else reading later.. > > > > > > On Mon, 26 Sept 2022 at 14:15, Clebert Suconic > > > <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> the major bit from the release (2) only tells you about the API. > > >> Currently > > >> version 2 will be version 2 as long as we keep the API compatible with > > >> previous releases. (When we make it 3.0 it means we can remove a few > > >> deprecated methods and other stuff) > > >> > > >> > > >> The second bit, 2.26.0 (26), means we had ** Twenty Six ** releases > > >> fixing > > >> bugs and improvements since we released the very first 2.0 back in 2017: > > >> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/releases/tag/2.0.0 > > >> > > > Due to 2.y.z releases as well, it is actually now 34 releases since 2.0.0. > > > > > >> ActiveMQ Artemis was initially donated from HornetQ, and back then we > > >> made > > >> a roadmap for features we must implement to get the same features from > > >> ActiveMQ. I believe at this point we are already beyond.. and that page > > >> needs some updating probably to reflect the current state. > > >> > > >> Also, to talk about production ready quality, the codebase of ActiveMQ > > >> Artemis was donated to ActiveMQ back in 2017 from HornetQ. It is a very > > >> stable codebase. I have myself dedicated the past 14 years of my > > >> profession > > >> to this codebase... along other developers who I highly consider, and > > >> many > > >> other open source contributors... So it is definitely production quality. > > > It was late 2014 for the donation, 2015 for the Artemis 1.0.0 release, > > > and then 2017 had the Artemis 2.0.0 release. > > > > > >> Talking about that, I'm releasing 2.26.0 today. > > >> > > >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 6:12 AM Mark Johnson<mark.john...@flooid.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Although Artemis is at Release 2, I cannot find a direct statement in > > >>> the > > >>> online documentation that Artemis is production ready. In contrast, this > > >>> page suggests that Artemis is *not* production ready > > >>> https://activemq.apache.org/activemq-artemis-roadmap. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Naturally, I must provide evidence that Artemis is considered production > > >>> ready by the ActiveMQ team before investing any further effort in > > >>> deploying > > >>> and testing Artemis to replace Classic. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> We are considering Artemis simply because the reporting performance of > > >>> Artemis is significantly higher than Classic. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> * Mark* > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> *Johnson* > > >>> > > >>> Principal Product Architect > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Flooid, PCMS House, Torwood Close > > >>> > > >>> Westwood Business Park > > >>> > > >>> Coventry, CV4 8HX, United Kingdom > > >>> > > >>> T: +442475269508 > > >>> > > >>> M: 07764305692 > > >>> > > >>> E:mark.john...@flooid.com > > >>> > > >>> * flooid.com<https://www.flooid.com/>* > > >>> > > >>> *Click here to send me something sensitive or securely! > > >>> <https://sendsafely.pcmsgroup.com/u/Mark.Johnson%40flooid.com>* > > >>> > > >>> [image: Download now] > > >>> <https://www.incisiv.com/playbook-unified-commerce-for-grocery-convenience-retail> > > >>> > > >>> The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the person > > >>> or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or > > >>> privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient of this > > >>> e-mail, > > >>> the use of this information or any disclosure, copying or distribution > > >>> is > > >>> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you received this in error, please > > >>> contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The views > > >>> expressed in this e-mail may not necessarily be the views of Flooid Ltd > > >>> and > > >>> should not be taken as authority to carry out any instruction contained. > > >>> Flooid Ltd reserves the right to monitor and examine the content of all > > >>> e-mails. Flooid Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with > > >>> company number 1459419 whose registered office is at PCMS House, Torwood > > >>> Close, Westwood Business Park, Coventry CV4 8HX, United Kingdom. VAT > > >>> No: GB > > >>> 705338743. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Clebert Suconic > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic > -- Clebert Suconic
