On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:14 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I looked at PB for an architecture with one client distributing some > processing to several servers. Now I came across JMS and I have seen that > using ActiveMQ with the Stomp protocol there would be a good support for > Python. > Surprising I couldn’t find any article comparing the two technologies. I > wonder if they target different problems (it doesn’t look to me). > Is anyone able to sketch advantages of one solution against the other? > > I don't think there is a good comparison between the two because they're different technologies addressing different problems. JMS is a messaging middleware defined at the Java language API level (hence the need to for STOMP protocol and similar adapting layers for use with Python or other non-Java languages). PB is a "secure, easy-to-use Remote Procedure Call (RPC) mechanism."
For the system you're descibing it seems like message middleware is more what you want. Unless you want to implement your own load balacing, work distribution and failover algorithms? Another alternative to ActiveMQ is RabbitMQ which implements AMQP, which a Python client can speak directly without using a limited protocol like STOMP. There's also handful of good AMQP python libs including one for use in Twisted: txamqp. -Drew
_______________________________________________ Twisted-Python mailing list [email protected] http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python
