[jira] [Assigned] (GEODE-6585) tuning advice for subscription-ack-interval has multiple problems

["Bill Burcham (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-6585?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Bill Burcham reassigned GEODE-6585:
-----------------------------------

    Assignee: Bill Burcham

> tuning advice for subscription-ack-interval has multiple problems
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: GEODE-6585
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-6585
>             Project: Geode
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: docs
>            Reporter: Bill Burcham
>            Assignee: Bill Burcham
>            Priority: Major
>
> On this page:
> [https://gemfire.docs.pivotal.io/97/geode/developing/events/limit_server_subscription_queue_size.html]
> the first paragraph under
> {code:java}
> subscription-ack-interval{code}
> has some inconsistencies:
> {quote}Optional: Increase the frequency of queue synchronization. This only applies to configurations where server redundancy is used for high availability. Increase the client’s pool configuration, subscription-ack-interval. The client periodically sends a batch acknowledgment of messages to the server, rather than acknowledging each message individually. A lower setting speeds message delivery and generally reduces traffic between the server and client. A higher setting helps contain server queue size.
> {quote}
> Third sentence: “Increase…subscription-ack-interval“—this seems backward to me. It certainly disagrees with the first sentence since the interval is inversely proportional to the frequency.
> Fifth sentence: “…and generally reduces traffic…“—is that true? I doubt it.
> Last sentence: “A higher setting helps contain server queue size.“—again backward.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)