Resolution:
Description:
= = = = = =
EMS performance with EMS Route versus Direct a connection across a WAN.

1). Removal of Redundancy: Communications between clients and the daemon is via TCP/IP. The client can be located anywhere in a routed network. For performance reasons, it may be required to place another EMS daemon on a different subnet and use routing to move the messages across the router between the EMS daemons. In this way, the message only crosses the router once regardless of the number of consumers and producers for the routed destinations. Without using this technique, the same message would cross the router for each consumer across the subnet barrier. This is especially important when moving messages across slower wide-area links that have more restrictions on bandwidth.

2).  More efficient use of Network resources: If many EMS producing clients (for instance)  in New York are connected via a WAN to an EMS server in London, then each of these clients will have to maintain a seperate TCP link which effectively increases the bandwidth. On the otherhand, using an EMS route where producing clients only have to connect to a local EMS server (which in turn connects via an EMS route to the EMS instance in London) helps to reduce activity on the network.

If the number of scriscribers is low, you should run some tests to see if using a router will achive what you want.

EMS Route versus a Direct connection across a WAN.