On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 8:56 PM, boday<[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the information. This definitely makes me hesitant to continue > using Camel 1.6.X with SMX 3.X. It sounds like there are various > performance issues that likely won't be resolved until I move to 2.X and SMX > 4 (neither of which is released yet). Any ETA on when both SMX 4 and Camel > 2.0 will be production ready? > > I guess I'm back to using servicemix-eip, servicemix-jms and servicemix-http > components (painful in comparison to the Camel implementation). > > From a performance perspective. I am seeing decent numbers routing from > HTTP to AMQ now (500+/sec), but as soon as I route through in either a > process() method or a JBI service, the throughput drops significantly > (~100/sec). I'm going to rework my application to not use Camel at all to > see where I end up.
The internal modifications and architecture changes for Camel 2.0 allows us to do massive speed optimizations in Camel routing engine. That should get you back to the 500+/sec when you using the route (as you get only now if doing all work in a single bean class). In Camel 1.x it does a fair amount of work under the covers to ensure messages are transported safely from one node to the next in the route. By doing this more intelligently in Camel 2.x we can gain much performance. Notice the performance hit is only when you do the "go as fast as you can". If you just route a low/medium sized amount of messages then the overhead is low. > > Anyone else have any comments on this? Are others seeing better performance > using these components? > > thanks... > > > > > ----- > Ben - Senior Consultant > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Camel-throughput-issues...HTTP-to-AMQ-tp24648117p24705812.html > Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > -- Claus Ibsen Apache Camel Committer Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
