A company is developing an application that processes orders. The application uses Azure Service Bus queues to decouple order submission from processing. During peak hours, some messages are not processed within the required time, causing order delays. The team needs to increase throughput without changing the existing message processing logic. What should they do?
Increasing the number of concurrent listeners on an Azure Service Bus queue directly enhances the application's ability to process messages in parallel. Each additional listener can fetch and process messages independently, allowing multiple messages to be consumed simultaneously from the queue. This parallel processing significantly boosts the overall message throughput, reducing the backlog and improving the responsiveness of the order processing application by distributing the workload across more consumer instances.
Why this answer
Increasing the number of concurrent listeners on the Service Bus queue allows multiple message receivers to process messages in parallel, directly increasing throughput without altering the existing message processing logic. This leverages the competing consumers pattern, where each listener independently receives and processes messages from the same queue, effectively scaling out the processing capacity.
Exam trap
The trap here is that candidates often confuse increasing lock duration (a reliability setting) with increasing throughput, or they assume that enabling sessions or switching to Event Hubs will magically improve performance without understanding the fundamental scalability mechanism of competing consumers.
How to eliminate wrong answers
Option A is wrong because Azure Event Hubs is designed for high-throughput event ingestion and telemetry streaming, not for decoupled order processing with guaranteed delivery and transactional support; it does not support message lock, deferral, or dead-lettering, which are required for reliable order processing. Option C is wrong because enabling sessions on a queue groups related messages and ensures ordered processing per session, but it does not increase throughput; in fact, it can reduce parallelism because all messages in a session must be processed by a single receiver. Option D is wrong because increasing the lock duration on messages gives more time to process a message before it becomes available to other consumers, but it does not increase throughput; it only prevents premature message abandonment and can actually delay processing if a message is locked for too long.