qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andy Goldstein" <agold...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Review Request: QPID-3280: When sending a large number of messages with nonzero TTLs to a cluster, overall message throughput drops by around 20-30% compared to messages with TTL 0.
Date Tue, 31 May 2011 15:35:19 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/791/#review737
-----------------------------------------------------------



/trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Message.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/791/#comment1486>

    I had put a TODO/question in my original patch asking if this time needed to be based
on the cluster time, but I didn't change the code here (talking only about props->setExpiration)
because it didn't look like the broker/cluster used the expiration value from the message
properties...should this be based on the cluster time too, or does it not matter?



/trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/Cluster.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/791/#comment1487>

    maybe add a comment that this method is called as part of the initial state transfer when
joining a cluster



/trunk/qpid/python/examples/api/spout
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/791/#comment1488>

    I added this to help me out w/testing - there is already an open JIRA (QPID-2890) to add
support for TTL (among other things) in spout, and the patch proposes -L for TTL, so this
would conflict.  Probably want to coordinate or just drop this from my patch and pull in the
patch for 2890 separately


- Andy


On 2011-05-31 15:09:06, Alan Conway wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/791/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2011-05-31 15:09:06)
> 
> 
> Review request for qpid, Andrew Stitcher, Alan Conway, Gordon Sim, and Andy Goldstein.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> QPID-3280: When sending a large number of messages with nonzero TTLs to a cluster, overall
message throughput drops by around 20-30% compared to messages with TTL 0.
> 
> Replaced the complicated message expirly logic in the cluster with a simpler "cluster
clock" for expiry of messages with TTL.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Broker.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/ExpiryPolicy.h 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/ExpiryPolicy.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/Message.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/QueueCleaner.h 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/broker/QueueCleaner.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/Cluster.h 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/Cluster.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/ClusterPlugin.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/ClusterSettings.h 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/ClusterTimer.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/Connection.h 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/Connection.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/ExpiryPolicy.h 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/ExpiryPolicy.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/cluster/UpdateClient.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/sys/Timer.h 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/sys/Timer.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/tests/QueueTest.cpp 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/cpp/xml/cluster.xml 1128070 
>   /trunk/qpid/python/examples/api/spout 1128070 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/791/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alan
> 
>


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