|  | 
 
  
    | RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support | RSS Feed - Message Broker Support |  
 
  
	|    |  |  
  
	| PostitApply performance is horrible. | « View previous topic :: View next topic » |  
  	| 
		
		
		  | Author | Message |  
		  | simon.starkie | 
			  
				|  Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2002 12:38 pm    Post subject: PostitApply performance is horrible. |   |  |  
		  | Disciple
 
 
 Joined: 24 Mar 2002Posts: 180
 
 
 | 
			  
				| Hi, 
 We use PostitApply to simulate a shared memory object which contains global values that our message flows need to use often.
 
 We use PostitApply to determine if a particular Postit object name already exists and if not, we use PostitCreate to create one.
 
 Each message flow calls a common subflow to do this PostitApply check in order to make sure that the first message coming through message flows for a particular execution group causes the Postit shared memory object to be instantiated. In retrospect, there may have been a better design, like not starting any message flows until a single "init" message flow has built the Postit object for all execution groups (one init per group, only executed once at startup time much as a servlet engine would do it...).
 
 At any rate, we have found that PostitApply slows down our message flows from 50 milliseconds to 100 milliseconds or more.
 
 If we wire around the PostitApply, the performance improves back to 50 milliseconds.
 
 The options we use for PostitApply are:
 NodeType=PostitApply
 PostitName=Broker
 CopyDataTo=Root.WKSPACE.CIB
 MatchOn=All Messages
 PostitScope=ExecutionGroup
 Description=blah blah
 
 Does anyone know of an alternative to using PostitApply to check for the existence of a particular Postit object?
 
 Does anyone know of a way we can do accomplish the same check a little more efficiently. For example, check a Root field for null?
 
 Cheers
  |  |  
		  | Back to top |  |  
		  |  |  
		  | CodeCraft | 
			  
				|  Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:25 pm    Post subject: |   |  |  
		  | Disciple
 
 
 Joined: 05 Sep 2001Posts: 195
 
 
 | 
			  
				| Would it be nicer to use the support pack for accessing environment variables (given elsewhere in the group)? |  |  
		  | Back to top |  |  
		  |  |  
		  |  |  |  
  
	|    |  | Page 1 of 1 |  
 
 
  
  	| 
		
		  | 
 
 | You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum
 You cannot edit your posts in this forum
 You cannot delete your posts in this forum
 You cannot vote in polls in this forum
 
 |  |  |  |