The thoughput would become higher as you increase concurrency.
The main bottleneck of Q4M is generally the disk synchronization IOPS.
I would have to say that in your case the disk seems to be a bit
slow, but the throughput should become higher in proportion to the
number of workers (if you are handling small messages).
2010/3/16 James McGill <jbmc...@gmail.com>:
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Q4M - a Message Queue for MySQL" group.
> To post to this group, send email to q4m-g...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> q4m-general...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/q4m-general?hl=en.
>
--
Kazuho Oku
We determined that the raid controller we ran the benchmarks on did
not have a battery backed write cache.
We installed a BBWC upgrade on the server and performance is really
great when running the benchmark script now:
concurrency 10 we get about 4500 messages / sec
concurrency 100 we get about 7000 messages / sec
concurrency 300 we get about 20000 messages / sec
If anybody is not getting high volumes of concurrent throughput
through Q4M be sure to check that you have write cache enabled.
cheers,
james