Hi,<br><br>Thanks for your reply.<div class="im"><br><br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote">In the one the publisher can publish as fast as it likes (within the<br>
limits imposed by internal flow control in the broker) while with the<br>
other publishing and consuming messages happen in lockstep - that's why<br>
it's slower.<br></blockquote></div><br>What do you mean by in lockstep?<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 16 August 2012 17:12, Emile Joubert <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:emile@rabbitmq.com" target="_blank">emile@rabbitmq.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
On 16/08/12 01:07, Tom Wrigg wrote:<br>
> The first method uses two separate processes - one for the publishing<br>
> app - one for the consuming app. It produces a latency of about at 4ms.<br>
> The second method uses just one app to produce and consume. This<br>
> produces a latency of about 40ms. Can anyone explain to me why? Thank<br>
> you for your time.<br>
<br>
In the one the publisher can publish as fast as it likes (within the<br>
limits imposed by internal flow control in the broker) while with the<br>
other publishing and consuming messages happen in lockstep - that's why<br>
it's slower.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
-Emile<br>
<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br>