[rabbitmq-discuss] Windows vs Linux

[Tim Watson]

You're welcome - good luck with it and feel free to drop by here or #rabbitmq on freenode if you need to chat about anything.

Cheers,
Tim

On 18 Mar 2013, at 14:15, Ochsner, Andrew wrote:

> Thanks Tim!  I’ll explore this a bit but sounds like either platform is solid and unlikely to cause us much grief.
>  
>  
> >Just to follow up, I've been provided with an internal (VMWare) blog post indicating that Rabbit can perform fantastically on Windows, so you can probably ignore my fud below. Take a look for yourself: http://blogs.vmware.com/vfabric/2012/12/net-rabbitmq-scales-to-100s-of-millions-of-passenger-messages-at-15below.html
> > 
> >Cheers,
> >Tim
> > 
> >On 13 Mar 2013, at 18:08, Tim Watson wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Andy,
> > 
> > My general exp with erlang is that it's better behaved on Linux, with regards performance (overlapping I/O on Windows wasn't well handled in prior versions, though > R14/R15 may have improved those stories). Also widows imposes limits on the maximum available memory for a process and even on 64bit windows a 32bit emulator is limited to 2Gb - the 64bit emulator does better but is still limited compared to Linux.
> > 
> > Having said that, I understand that we have many happy customers running rabbit on windows! Matthias or Simon will probably be able to say more about those - not sure if there are any case studies available?
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Tim
> > 
> > On 13 Mar 2013, at 17:51, "Ochsner, Andrew" <Andrew.Ochsner at csgi.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Hello:
> >> 
> >> We are trying to decide on what OS to target our brokers on.   Our consumers (at least initially) will be written in .NET so the initial preference is to have the brokers sit side-by-side with the consumers.  We’ll be interested in taking advantage of HA capabilities as well as high throughput.  I know Windows and Linux are both supported, but I’m just curious if there’s a general preference one way or the other that might help lead us down a good path.  We’re building a centralized logging system so resiliency and throughput are pretty important.  Obviously we’ll need to do our own benchmarking down the road and adjust based on those findings, but we need to start somewhere.
> >>  
> >> Thanks
> >>  
> >> Andrew Ochsner  |  Intentional Architecture
> >> T +01 402 431 7583
> >> A 18020 Burt St, Omaha, NE  68022
> >> E andrew.ochsner at csgi.com
> >>  
> >> <image001.gif>
> >>  
> >> 
> >> All emails in this message string and any attachments are the confidential information of CSG Systems International, Inc. (CSG), or its affiliates and subsidiaries, and may contain privileged and/or confidential material. If you are not an intended recipient, please delete it immediately and notify the sender; unintended recipients are not authorized to read or otherwise use the information contained herein.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> >> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> >> https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
>  
> _______________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss