On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Afkham Azeez <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Isuru Perera <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Afkham Azeez <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Afkham Azeez <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> With the new Hazelcast based clustering implementation, in fact, >>>> cluster messaging is done using a Hazelcast topic the same pub/sub >>>> semantics. So, do we really need to use MB? >>>> >>>> What are the advantages of MB compared to Hazelcast topics? >>>> >>> >>> Another aspect to think about is that for MB in memory mode, in the >>> future, we could end up using Hazelcast topics/queues. If so, shifting from >>> cluster messaging to MB would not make that much of a difference. >>> >> Yes! If we can overcome current DepSync issues with Hazelcast, there will >> be no point in going for an MB. >> > > > What are the current Hazelcast related depsync issues? > > Please let us know if there are any Hazelcast related issues, because we could easily get help from the Hz devs.
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
