1 JMS Server [3 Queues] OR 3 JMS Servers [1 Q each]

Question

          Hi
          I am still debating myself which configuration is better purely from performance
          perspective whether to have multiple queues hosted my the same JMS server or give
          one JMS server per Queue. Just wondering if someone can throw some light on this
          as I dont see this thing addressed in the JMS performance guide - is it because
          it dosent make any difference?
          I am trying to figure out if in the first setup since all queues will use the
          same store they will end up using a where clause to get data from the Queue and
          in the 2nd case it will be like select * without a where clause? In that case
          the 2nd config will give better performance. I am using file store.
          Its likely that in my configuration one of the Queues is going to be pounded big
          time whereas the other 2 queues message volume will be significantly low.
          Any thoughts/pointers is appreciated.
          thanks
          Anamitra
          

Answer 1

Internally, the JDBC store does simple
          inserts/deletes/single-record-selects -
          it has notion of destinations.
          I'm fairly sure that the JMS Performance Guide does cover this topic,
          but I don't have time to comb through it. Anyhow, with DB stores
          I think it is likely you will get better performace by using
          multiple stores - provided the introduction of multiple
          stores doesn't start forcing too many transactions to become
          two-phase that were one-phase before. Each store
          counts as an XA resource, so two stores in the same
          transaction forces a 2PC transaction.
          (With file stores one might get worse performance.)
          Tom
          Anamitra wrote:
          > Hi
          > I am still debating myself which configuration is better purely from performance
          > perspective whether to have multiple queues hosted my the same JMS server or give
          > one JMS server per Queue. Just wondering if someone can throw some light on this
          > as I dont see this thing addressed in the JMS performance guide - is it because
          > it dosent make any difference?
          >
          > I am trying to figure out if in the first setup since all queues will use the
          > same store they will end up using a where clause to get data from the Queue and
          > in the 2nd case it will be like select * without a where clause? In that case
          > the 2nd config will give better performance. I am using file store.
          SQL has nothing to do with file stores, so I don't understand
          the question. Anyhow, I happen to
          know that no JDBC store SQL references queues - messages
          are handled individually regardless of queue
          or topic.
          >
          > Its likely that in my configuration one of the Queues is going to be pounded big
          > time whereas the other 2 queues message volume will be significantly low.
          I think there is little point in seperating into seperate stores unless
          all stores would be very active.
          Anyhow, this is all simple enough to test on your own as it
          only involves configuration changes. I highly
          recommend trying it out.
          >
          > Any thoughts/pointers is appreciated.
          > thanks
          > Anamitra