[rabbitmq-discuss] Can RabbitMQ handle big messages?

[Zabrane Mickael]

Crystal clear. Thanks Jerry.

Regards,
Zabrane

On Mar 13, 2012, at 7:03 AM, Jerry Kuch wrote:

> Hi, Zabrane:
> 
> Ultimately you'll be limited by disk space.  If a queue gets large with messages
> that are either unconsumed, or delivered but not ACKed, and the broker determines
> that it's under memory pressure, it will page messages to files on disk, blocking
> producers in the meantime using TCP back pressure.  The mechanism is discussed here:
> 
> http://www.rabbitmq.com/memory.html
> 
> In practice you don't want to routinely be flirting with the memory watermark, and
> as a rule, its value is probably best left at the default 0.40 level.  In production
> you should make sure your monitoring/alerting system is watching broker memory usage,
> and probably the lengths and memory consumption of queues of importance to your app.
> If queues are getting uncharacteristically backed up, it's often because something
> has changed or gone wrong (unexpected producer load, crashed or buggy consumers,
> etc.).
> 
> Best regards,
> Jerry
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Zabrane Mickael" <zabrane3 at gmail.com>
> To: "Tony Garnock-Jones" <tonygarnockjones+rabbitmq at gmail.com>
> Cc: rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 10:41:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] Can RabbitMQ handle big messages?
> 
> 
> 
> This leads me to this question: 
> 
> 
> Let assume I'm able to ensure that all my messages are less than 100Kb. 
> 
> 
> How many messages one RabbitMQ mode can handle at any given time? Is there any limitation? 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards, 
> Zabrane 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 12, 2012, at 5:39 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote: 
> 
> 
> On 12 March 2012 12:23, Zabrane Mickael < zabrane3 at gmail.com > wrote: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 12, 2012, at 5:02 PM, Matthew Sackman wrote: 
> 
> 
> For those of us struggling to follow this, if you're currently in the 
> act of receiving data from node X, why can't you assume node X is still 
> alive? I.e. what is wrong with treating arbitrary data from node X as 
> evidence it's still alive, in lieu of a heartbeat from node X? 
> 
> 
> 
> http://learnyousomeerlang.com/distribunomicon 
> 
> Yes, that repeats the information that Irmo started this subthread with. It doesn't address Matthew's question at all, though. 
> 
> Perhaps the erlang list is a better place for us to be asking about this, Matthew, since it's not directly about Rabbit - are you on that list? I'm not currently subscribed. 
> 
> Tony 
> -- 
> Tony Garnock-Jones 
> tonygarnockjones at gmail.com 
> http://homepages.kcbbs.gen.nz/tonyg/ 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss