Which anticipation expresses cause for this condition?

The integration team has reported a problem in testing a few deployed MDBs. By design,
each MDB listens to one of four named queues. Two producers write messages to each
queue. The test issues messages of the same payload type that each producer will send,
but varies the number or size of these messages to measure the messaging server’s
performance. The team has noticed that the utilization remains at the same high rate any
time the test writes messages destined for the third MDB. The message server log does not
reveal any failure in sending messages to this MDB. Which anticipation expresses cause for
this condition?

The integration team has reported a problem in testing a few deployed MDBs. By design,
each MDB listens to one of four named queues. Two producers write messages to each
queue. The test issues messages of the same payload type that each producer will send,
but varies the number or size of these messages to measure the messaging server’s
performance. The team has noticed that the utilization remains at the same high rate any
time the test writes messages destined for the third MDB. The message server log does not
reveal any failure in sending messages to this MDB. Which anticipation expresses cause for
this condition?

A.
Hot Potato

B.
Leaky Abstraction

C.
Cache less Cow

D.
Golden Hammer



Leave a Reply 0

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *