W dniu 30 marca 2012 13:56 użytkownik Armin Resch <resc...@gmail.com> napisał: > Hi David, > > thx much for the reply. > > Yes, I recall from OSCON2008 that there was grief about ActiveMQ-bugginess. > I myself have used POE for years in production systems and am quite happy > with it. Great idea to use it for messaging. Two more questions come to > mind: > > 1 - Have you connected stomp clients to it that are written in languages > other then Perl?
Yes! It works great for non-Perl clients. > 2 - Have you hooked up databases for persistency? I'm thinking PostgreSQL. Yes! PoCo::MQ has a number of "storage backends", some which are persistent and some which aren't. They can also be combined in various ways for different performance characteristics. One of those backends is against DBI. We used MySQL but it likely works with Postgres too - and if not, I'm sure the patch would be minor. Check out the docs: http://search.cpan.org/perldoc?POE::Component::MessageQueue#STORAGE > The current platform I'm working with doesn't lend itself well to running > erlang on it. So, unless it changes, I'd think I'll go for PoCo::MQ if > msg'ing is required. > > And since you wrote it and are actively using it, there might be a chance it > won't atrophy :). Well, I'm actually not actively using. :-) I was one of the original authors but I recently passed maintainership on to someone else. The company I was working at when we developed PoCo::MQ was bought and then shut down. Anyway, others are actively using it and there is a new maintainer who is dedicated to the project - so it will live on. :-) Best regards, David. > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 6:03 AM, David Snopek <dsno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Armin, >> >> Yes, for a couple years I used it in production. It handled a number >> of different applications, but the most intense was an image >> processing application that actually sent the images themselves as the >> message payload. >> >> I don't know about the current state of ActiveMQ, but I can tell you >> that back then it couldn't handle the type of load that was necessary >> for our applications. We crashed it lots. ;-) That's actually what >> inspired the creation of PoCo::MQ! >> >> However, RabbitMQ seems very promising! I haven't tried it, but >> personally, if I needed a message queue for a big application *today*, >> I'd probably give that a try first just to see what it's like. >> >> At this point I think the biggest selling point of PoCo::MQ is that >> it's based on Perl, so if you already maintain a Perl stack and have >> Perl developers, it's a good choice. If you don't really care about >> setting up an Erlang environment, getting Erlang devs to customize it >> (or just don't care about customizing it) than RabbitMQ has a really >> vibrant growing community, so it seems like a good choice. >> >> Anyway, PoCo::MQ can work in production if you need it to. :-) >> >> Best regards, >> David. >> >> W dniu 29 marca 2012 23:06 użytkownik Armin Resch <ar...@reschab.net> >> napisał: >> > Hi, >> > >> > has anybody used this POE-based implementation of a Stomp server in a >> > production setting? It runs decently on my underpowered Linux-based >> > embedded test system but was wondering how it compares against other >> > implementations like Active-/RabbitMQ. >> > >> > Rgds, >> > -ar >> >> >> >> -- >> Blog: http://www.linguatrek.com >> Product: http://www.bibliobird.com > > -- Blog: http://www.linguatrek.com Product: http://www.bibliobird.com
