[CTJUG Forum] Re: ActiveMQ

[Ben van der Merwe]

Oh, and one other thing: If you want reliability with OpenJMS (and probably other JMS implementations too), keep your server and client clocks all in sync. OpenJMS will throw messages away when the clock goes backward. Clock drift and adjustments badly affects the message expiration logic. Jeff Mutonho wrote: On 5/8/06, Ben van der Merwe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Jeff, I've used and evaluated a large number of JMS implementations over the last couple of years. Here's my fast-and-superficial run-down: OpenJMS: Stable. Easy to use. Definitely not the best performing (not NIO-based which is essential for high performance) ActiveMQ: Receiving most of the development action and attention. High performance, but its development is so rapid that I won't regard any given release as stable. Part of Geronimo and lots of eyeballs. More difficult to configure because of myriad configuration and hosting options. Joram: Good performance. Very stable (4.3.14). What we are using and what I would recommend. These are the three big FLOSS players, with the exception of the JBoss implementation, which I know little of. Also note that the Sun Java System Message Queue Platform Edition (http://www.sun.com/software/products/message_queue_pe/index.xml) is free for commercial use. The Enterprise Edition is pay-ware. Of course, FioranoMQ is what you really want, if you can afford it. Regards, Ben Thanx Jeff GoogleTalk : ejbengine Skype : ejbengine Registered Linux user number 366042 -- Ben van der Merwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CTJUG Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to CTJUG-Forum@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/CTJUG-Forum -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---