Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #21196
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-08 00:00 -0800 |
| References | <94fcfac6-eff5-4e84-956a-8a7970867867@googlegroups.com> <0e808ee4-0f98-47fd-bf72-ee98ad7bcc81@googlegroups.com> |
| Message-ID | <cfc82afc-6623-4e5e-9af6-d11b857379a9@googlegroups.com> (permalink) |
| Subject | Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc. |
| From | Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> |
On Monday, January 7, 2013 10:01:12 PM UTC+1, me 2 wrote: > 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. As far as I can see that's just _one_ product. That does not necessarily mean that all others have the same overhead, does it? Kind regards robert
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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