[openamq-dev] Tuning

[Martin Sustrik]

I'll try your scenario, but maybe the difference is in the kernel used. 
Which one exactly are you using?

Thanks.
Martin

R Hayes wrote:
> The benchmark sends 100 messages as fast as it can, pauses for 1  
> second, and repeats.  We run it for 100 of these cycles.  The results  
> were consistent from run to run once we tamed the O/S (low latency  
> kernel).
> 
> I'm on vacation now, but when I get back I will show you the data.
> 
> -r
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 25, 2007, at 7:35 AM, Martin Sustrik wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>>> That was a 34% improvement on relatively exotic network hardware.
>>> Presumably the percentage gain will be smaller for cases where the
>>> CPU is a larger part of the overall latency.  Nonetheless, it can
>>> have a big impact.
>> I've did a single ping-pong test (bouncing-message back and forth) for
>> malloc and tcmalloc (linux on dual-core box) - in both cases the mean
>> latency and the median latency were almost the same.
>>
>> Can you elaborate a bit on what kind of testing scenario you've used  
>> for
>>  measuring the latency and - possibly - what kind of hardware have you
>> used?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> openamq-dev mailing list
>> openamq-dev at lists.openamq.org
>> http://lists.openamq.org/mailman/listinfo/openamq-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openamq-dev mailing list
> openamq-dev at lists.openamq.org
> http://lists.openamq.org/mailman/listinfo/openamq-dev