Re: Message prioritisation Vs prefetch-limit

[Christian Posta <ch...@gmail.com>]

Yes, that sounds correct.


On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 6:42 AM, deepak_a <an...@gmail.com> wrote:

> All,
>
> In the architecture I am working in, messages come into a ActiveMQ Queue
> from IBM MQ.
> An application/consumer polls the messages from this active MQ Queue.
>
> Messages from IBM MQ have a priority field set.
>
> By default ActiveMQ ignores the priority, so I have added the
> prioritization-destinationPolicy in broker-config.xml.
>
> In addition to that I am also considering setting prefetch limit to 0 in
> Camel's app Context (bean amq.connectionFactory)
> as per
> http://activemq.apache.org/what-is-the-prefetch-limit-for.html
>
>
> Without this I suppose - newly created high priority messags could be
> backed up behind prefetched low priority ones.
>
> - That's what I inferred from the above link. But same link also points out
> that - a high prefetch limit means better performance.
> So eventually its a trade off b/w performance and message prioritization?
>
> is my understanding correct?
>
> Note: Active-MQ is configured within JBoss & Camel does the job of moving
> messages b/w IBM MQ, Active MQ and the consumer.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-prioritisation-Vs-prefetch-limit-tp4663778.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>



-- 
*Christian Posta*
http://www.christianposta.com/blog
twitter: @christianposta