qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Godfrey <rob.j.godf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Inconsistent behaviour during performance testing
Date Fri, 17 Mar 2017 14:34:42 GMT
On 17 March 2017 at 10:26, Keith W <keith.wall@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Antonin
>
> Unfortunately, the Apache mailing lists strip attachments.  Please
> find an alternative way to share your graphs.
>
>
One option would be to create a JIRA for this performance issue, and to add
the graphs as attachments to that.

-- Rob


> Can you tell us more about the tests you are running?
>
> Version of the Java Broker?
> Which client are you using?  Which version?  If the older Qpid JMS
> Client AMQP 0-x - which protocol are you using 0-10 or 0-91?
> What are your Direct/Heap JVM memory settings?
>
> Availability of memory will have an effect on performance.  There is
> background here:
> http://qpid.apache.org/releases/qpid-java-6.1.1/java-broker/
> book/Java-Broker-Runtime-Memory.html
> This includes details of the strategy employed to flow transient
> messages to disk when memory is tight.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Keith.
>
>
> On 16 March 2017 at 16:52, Vyborny Antonin
> <antonin.vyborny@deutsche-boerse.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > I have run some performance testing measuring the throughput for sending,
> > receiving and also both in parallel. Please see the image I attached
> > (sending).
> >
> > I have measured with three different message sizes (1024, 10240 and
> 102400
> > bytes). I am using from 1 to 20 threads for sending and the weird
> behaviour
> > occurs when sending 102400 bytes messages. You can clearly see from the
> > image that when I use 1-10 threads it is too slow and then suddenly it
> > became much faster.
> >
> > The strange is that this was not just one test case, I run it multiple
> > times.
> >
> > The same testing I performed on different brokers, but only Java broker
> has
> > this behaviour.
> >
> >
> >
> > Is there anything I might be missing? Any misconfiguration? I already
> tried
> > to play with JVM memory and it looks like it has some impact to it…
> When I
> > increased the memory it became faster since 3rd thread…
> >
> >
> >
> > Please note I was using asynchronous sending + non persistent delivery
> mode.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> >
> >
> > Antonin Vyborny
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Diese E-Mail enthaelt vertrauliche oder rechtlich geschuetzte
> Informationen.
> > Wenn Sie nicht der beabsichtigte Empfaenger sind, informieren Sie bitte
> > sofort den Absender und loeschen Sie diese E-Mail. Das unbefugte Kopieren
> > dieser E-Mail oder die unbefugte Weitergabe der enthaltenen Informationen
> > ist nicht gestattet.
> >
> > The information contained in this message is confidential or protected by
> > law. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and
> > delete this message. Any unauthorised copying of this message or
> > unauthorised distribution of the information contained herein is
> prohibited.
> >
> > Legally required information for business correspondence/
> > Gesetzliche Pflichtangaben fuer Geschaeftskorrespondenz:
> > http://deutsche-boerse.com/letterhead
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message