[rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ experience

Tony Garnock-Jones tonyg at lshift.net
Tue Jan 27 15:23:53 GMT 2009

Martin Sustrik wrote:
> Given all the methodological problems above and many more I haven't even 
> mentioned lead us to use a different metric internally. We call it 
> "message density" (1/lambda for those familiar with Erlang's work). It's 
> a time interval between two subsequent messages at a single point of the 
> network. The metric proved to be very stable and the tests are suddenly 
> reproducible :) Also, performance results make much more sense when 
> measured using density metric. Check following two graphs:
> http://www.zeromq.org/results:0mq-tests-v03#toc4

This is very interesting!

On another tack entirely, when measuring toxicity, the only sensible way
of specifying how poisonous something is is to use LD50, the "lethal
dose 50%", i.e. that dose at which there is a 50% chance of death (or at
which 50% of your dosed population dies, etc.). (Also used are LD75,
LD90 etc.)

Is there some kind of LD50-like concept that could be used in measuring
peak capacity?

 [][][] Tony Garnock-Jones     | Mob: +44 (0)7905 974 211
   [][] LShift Ltd             | Tel: +44 (0)20 7729 7060
 []  [] http://www.lshift.net/ | Email: tonyg at lshift.net

More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list