On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun <[email protected]> wrote:
> Now when I've first seen AMQP I've said: "finally a protocol which > is both simple, flexible and implementable"... (Unfortunately each > broker is still compatible only with the "sanctioned" libraries...) It takes around six months to make a high-performance AMQP client stack. Large vendors broke interoperability with their own bizarre versions of AMQP. AMQP/1.0 is so complex that the plan is to create a single C binding and then wrap it in various languages. Somehow it didn't quite work as planned... > But still, AMQP was born from the shortcomings of existing solutions, > especially JMS, which was API based, not protocol based, and I had > high hopes... (Currently I use both RabbitMQ and ZeroMQ for different > purposes.) We all had high hopes :-) > So from what I've seen on OpenMAMA page, they go back to an API > based standard, thus allowing API "extensions" to cripple any window > of portability... Why??? Because NYSE runs this on 29West, as far as I know. AMQP fails as a scalable pub-sub standard, it's centralized and slow and complex. 0MQ's protocol would be rather better but it's not mature. So initiatives like OpenMAMA are a great way to push demand for large-scale messaging and eventually people will implement more and more pieces using 0MQ. -Pieter _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
