[LRUG] ActiveMQ advice?

[James Mead]

2008/5/30 David Salgado <david at digitalronin.com>:
> Many thanks for all the great advice. I think I'll definitely
> investigate some alternatives before I start wrangling ActiveMQ.
>
> I had hoped to have a persistent queue, but if I can redesign things
> to incorporate some kind of queue rebuilding process, in case the
> queue disappears, beanstalkd sounds like a good option.

I think we [1] found that it's better to concentrate on processing
messages as quickly as possible to avoid too much of a backlog
building up. That way having persistent messages is not so important
and in any case is usually easy to retro-fit. If you start from the
idea that your queue is going to be persistent, it's easy to be lazy
at making message processing efficient. Then you start having a big
backlog and you rely heavily on the queue persistence mechanism. I
think this is where we felt the pain with ActiveMQ.

-- 
James.
http://blog.floehopper.org

[1] http://www.reevoo.com