You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to users@activemq.apache.org by Mot <mo...@gmail.com> on 2010/09/20 09:38:37 UTC

load balancing in activemq

if i have only one consumer and multiple brokers attached to it. then for
load balancing which is better out of two either STICKY LOADBALANCING or
AUTODISCOVERY????

IN WHICH CASE ACTIVEMQ PERFORMANCE IS HIGH?? 

please reply me.thanx
-- 
View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/load-balancing-in-activemq-tp2546606p2546606.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: load balancing in activemq

Posted by Mot <mo...@gmail.com>.

thanks for ur help
-- 
View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/load-balancing-in-activemq-tp2546606p2548009.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: load balancing in activemq

Posted by Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>.

I prefer sticky load balancing in production, so no accidental instances that get fired up on the same network become part of the cluster.

On Sep 20, 2010, at 2:38 AM, Mot wrote:

> 
> if i have only one consumer and multiple brokers attached to it. then for
> load balancing which is better out of two either STICKY LOADBALANCING or
> AUTODISCOVERY????
> 
> IN WHICH CASE ACTIVEMQ PERFORMANCE IS HIGH?? 
> 
> please reply me.thanx
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/load-balancing-in-activemq-tp2546606p2546606.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.