<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Matthias Radestock <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:matthias@rabbitmq.com">matthias@rabbitmq.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">Shalin,<br>
<br>
Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:<br>
</div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The consumption rate holds throughout the test but it still seems low<br>
to me. I'd think that for such a small message payload, a single box<br>
should be able to do much more than these.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Try running the MulticastMain example that ships with the Java client, using the "-a -r <rate>" option and set the rate to 20000. That should be stable, i.e. production and consumption rates should match. Depending on your machine, you can probably go a bit higher than that.<div class="im">
<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'll try that out.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Is there something else that I should do to get better performance<br>
out of a single box?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
For a single producer, queue, consumer scenario the amount of parallelism is limited, so rabbit won't be utilising all the cores. If you have multiple independent streams, and/or fanout the figures will be higher.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I see. Let me try this out. Thanks!</div></div><br>-- <br>Regards,<br>Shalin Shekhar Mangar.<br>