FWIW, we have a group here using it (the Python API) in a production system (along with the C++ API), although they did have various complaints, primarily around the lack of an callback model for the messaging API.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Chris Howard <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the information. How mature is the python messaging API though? > It is referred to in the 0.6 documentation as a "candidate" API, and there > is also a list of areas that still need work. Is this client suitable for a > production system? > > On 14/07/2010 19:32, Alan Conway wrote: >> >> On 07/14/2010 10:05 AM, Chris Howard wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am currently evaluating qpid, to see if it would be suitable for use >>> within a load testing product. Initially, I am only interested in >>> running on Windows. I will need to use the C++, .NET, java and python >>> clients. >>> >>> I am not sure whether I should be using the "messaging" API, or the >>> standard API. What are the pros/cons of each? There seems to be very >>> little documentation for the messaging API, but it does seem to provide >>> a simpler interface, and the fact that it is not tied to a particular >>> version of AMQP is a plus. Is there any functionality that is not >>> available through this API? >> >> You should go with the messaging API, the old API will be deprecated and >> eventually removed. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
