This content has been marked as final.
Show 6 replies
-
1. Re: Are there performance numbers available comparing MQ vs
timfox Dec 15, 2006 3:50 AM (in response to batter)Here are some old results:
http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JBossMessagingPerformanceResultsPre1_0_1_RC4
For 1.2, the codebase is currently unoptimised, so you will probably find it quite slow. Optimisation will happen before the GA release (Q1 2007), and we will get some new figures for then. -
2. Re: Are there performance numbers available comparing MQ vs
batter Dec 18, 2006 12:51 PM (in response to batter)"timfox" wrote:
Here are some old results:
http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JBossMessagingPerformanceResultsPre1_0_1_RC4
For 1.2, the codebase is currently unoptimised, so you will probably find it quite slow. Optimisation will happen before the GA release (Q1 2007), and we will get some new figures for then.
Thanks, looks like an impressive improvement. I will try to setup and run these tests here also; if only to learn how to setup 4.0.5 and then install and configure/use messaging instead of MQ. For now I'll probably stick with 1.0.1 SP2. -
3. Re: Are there performance numbers available comparing MQ vs
ovidiu.feodorov Dec 19, 2006 8:35 PM (in response to batter)We have a framework you could use for that: http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JBossJMSNewPerformanceBenchmark
-
4. Re: Are there performance numbers available comparing MQ vs
batter Jan 3, 2007 8:54 PM (in response to batter)"ovidiu.feodorov@jboss.com" wrote:
We have a framework you could use for that: http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JBossJMSNewPerformanceBenchmark
Thanks, will give it a shot after figuring out why 'ant sar' fails because it can't download the dependencies (local proxy issues, I am sure) :-) -
5. Re: Are there performance numbers available comparing MQ vs
batter Jan 4, 2007 11:28 AM (in response to batter)"batter" wrote:
"ovidiu.feodorov@jboss.com" wrote:
We have a framework you could use for that: http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JBossJMSNewPerformanceBenchmark
Thanks, will give it a shot after figuring out why 'ant sar' fails because it can't download the dependencies (local proxy issues, I am sure) :-)
OK, past this hurdle (ANT_OPTS is my friend). Executing the tests however gives me the following error:
[java] 08:45:07,515 INFO [PerformanceTest] [java] 08:45:07,515 INFO [PerformanceTest] Execution 1 (provider JBossMessaging) [java] 08:45:07,968 WARN [PerformanceTest] job DRAIN JOB failed: Failed to config client side AOP [java] 08:45:07,968 INFO [PerformanceTest] 0. FAILURE [java] 08:45:07,968 INFO [PerformanceTest] 1. PARALLEL
In the log file:09:19:29,088 INFO [STDOUT] The Message Driven Bean failed! 09:19:29,088 ERROR [STDERR] java.lang.ClassCastException: org.jboss.jms.message.MessageProxy 09:19:29,088 ERROR [STDERR] at org.jboss.example.jms.ejb3mdb.EJB3MDBExample.businessLogic(EJB3MDBExample.java:51) 09:19:29,088 ERROR [STDERR] at org.jboss.example.jms.ejb3mdb.EJB3MDBExample.onMessage(EJB3MDBExample.java:40)
I ran the examples to make sure installation etc was done correctly. But apparently some remnants screw up the performance tests. I manually removed the ejb3 (and stateless) stuff from the deploy directory and restarted the tests.
This time I am getting a bit furher:
[java] 09:23:51,654 INFO [PerformanceTest] Execution 1 (provider JBossMessaging) [java] 09:23:51,748 WARN [PerformanceTest] job DRAIN JOB failed: Failed to config client side AOP [java] 09:23:51,748 INFO [PerformanceTest] 0. FAILURE [java] 09:23:51,748 INFO [PerformanceTest] 1. PARALLEL [java] 09:23:58,435 INFO [PerformanceTest] SEND JOB sent 1000 messages in 5016 ms with a target rate 200 messages/sec, real rate 199.36 messages/sec [java] 09:23:58,435 INFO [PerformanceTest] RECEIVE JOB received 1000 messages in 4954 ms with a target rate 0 messages/sec, real rate 201.86 message s/sec [java] 09:23:58,435 INFO [PerformanceTest] 2. PARALLEL [java] 09:24:01,060 INFO [PerformanceTest] SEND JOB sent 1000 messages in 2516 ms with a target rate 400 messages/sec, real rate 397.46 messages/sec [java] 09:24:01,060 INFO [PerformanceTest] RECEIVE JOB received 1000 messages in 2516 ms with a target rate 0 messages/sec, real rate 397.46 message s/sec
Apparently because of :09:23:51,638 INFO [Executor] RMIExecutor[//localhost:7777/local-messaging2] executed RESET REQUEST successfully 09:23:51,748 ERROR [SocketServerInvoker] Failed to accept socket connection java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.java:39) at sun.reflect.DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.java:27) at java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstance(Constructor.java:494) at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.ServerThread.createServerSocket(ServerThread.java:216) at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.ServerThread.<init>(ServerThread.java:108) at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.SocketServerInvoker.processInvocation(SocketServerInvoker.java:566) at org.jboss.remoting.transport.socket.SocketServerInvoker.run(SocketServerInvoker.java:515) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:595) Caused by: java.io.IOException: Mismatch version of JBossSerialization signature at org.jboss.serial.io.JBossObjectInputStream.checkSignature(JBossObjectInputStream.java:113) at org.jboss.serial.io.JBossObjectInputStream.<init>(JBossObjectInputStream.java:94) at org.jboss.remoting.serialization.impl.jboss.JBossSerializationManager.createInput(JBossSerializationManager.java:59) at org.jboss.jms.server.remoting.ServerSocketWrapper.createInputStream(ServerSocketWrapper.java:110) at org.jboss.jms.client.remoting.ClientSocketWrapper.createStreams(ClientSocketWrapper.java:116) at org.jboss.jms.client.remoting.ClientSocketWrapper.<init>(ClientSocketWrapper.java:67) at org.jboss.jms.server.remoting.ServerSocketWrapper.<init>(ServerSocketWrapper.java:64) ... 9 more
Any ideas ? -
6. Re: Are there performance numbers available comparing MQ vs
ovidiu.feodorov Jan 13, 2007 10:05 PM (in response to batter)"batter" wrote:
Any ideas ?
Incompatible remoting versions?