Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #21166

Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc.

X-Received by 10.66.82.37 with SMTP id f5mr8118289pay.27.1357592473604; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 13:01:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Received by 10.50.196.135 with SMTP id im7mr2653380igc.1.1357592473353; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 13:01:13 -0800 (PST)
Path csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!f6no16502715pbd.1!news-out.google.com!s9ni88763pbb.0!nntp.google.com!b8no9373054pbd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Date Mon, 7 Jan 2013 13:01:12 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To <94fcfac6-eff5-4e84-956a-8a7970867867@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.100.97.30; posting-account=LYoTOgoAAABkuGLLOGXg_LiQpwWAp52F
NNTP-Posting-Host 137.100.97.30
References <94fcfac6-eff5-4e84-956a-8a7970867867@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent G2/1.0
MIME-Version 1.0
Message-ID <0e808ee4-0f98-47fd-bf72-ee98ad7bcc81@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc.
From me 2 <winona_whitener@yahoo.com>
Injection-Date Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:01:13 +0000
Content-Type text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding quoted-printable
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:21166

Show key headers only | View raw

On Wednesday, December 26, 2012 4:26:17 PM UTC-5, me2 wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> 
> 
> I am a newbie to JMS and would appreciate some advice.
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone compared JMS to socket programming?  If I have N number of clients that need to connect to and send messages to 1 server, what is the comparison?  I would guess that sockets--direct from a client to the server--would be the fastest for speed and maybe take the least bandwidth.  But I would expect that there would only be negligible size increases for the JMS overhead once the connection was established and I would expect that a pub-sub topic would be able to smoke through sending the N number of clients messages, rather than loop through the connections/sockets and sending the message to each of them.
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone else looked at this?  I'm going through the exercise to set up a JMS server, but I thought maybe someone else could point me in the right direction.
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> me2

I figured that if anyone else had this problem, then it would be worth passing on this information.  

http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Message-bandwidth-overheads-how-to-reduce-td3718866.html

According to this, an empty message with no other information is about 300 and some odd bytes.  So, the plain socket in our extremely low bandwidth project might be better served with plain sockets.  Not the answer that I wanted, but still, at least, an answer.

Cheers all and thank you to everyone who responded.
me 2

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. me2 <winona_whitener@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-26 13:26 -0800
  Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-12-26 13:35 -0800
  Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-26 19:00 -0500
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. mcheung63@gmail.com - 2012-12-26 20:46 -0800
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-12-26 20:53 -0800
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-12-27 14:45 +0100
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-27 13:26 -0500
        Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2013-01-08 09:28 +0000
          Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-08 19:54 -0500
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 14:26 +0100
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-27 13:18 -0500
        Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 19:47 +0100
          Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-27 14:09 -0500
  Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2012-12-26 23:35 -0800
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2012-12-27 07:13 -0400
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-27 13:25 -0500
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2012-12-28 00:59 -0800
        Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-28 10:59 -0500
          Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2012-12-28 12:19 -0800
            Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-28 23:46 -0500
              Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-28 23:49 -0500
        Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2012-12-29 08:30 -0400
          Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-29 20:31 -0500
            Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-01-01 23:25 +0100
              Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-01-01 18:18 -0500
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-27 13:22 -0500
  Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. me2 <winona_whitener@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-28 07:25 -0800
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-28 10:50 -0500
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. me2 <winona_whitener@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-28 08:44 -0800
        Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-29 20:52 -0500
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-12-28 13:24 -0800
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2012-12-29 08:48 -0400
  Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. me 2 <winona_whitener@yahoo.com> - 2013-01-07 13:01 -0800
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2013-01-07 13:09 -0800
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-07 20:02 -0500
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-01-07 18:42 -0800
        Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-07 22:07 -0500
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-01-08 00:00 -0800
    Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-01-11 01:07 -0800
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-11 11:04 -0800
      Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-11 20:09 -0500

csiph-web