Yes it is absolutely reasonable and possible to have 2 competing
brokers. Competition is good for users. And this is my recommendation at
this point.
Hadrian
On 03/26/2015 01:22 PM, dlalaina wrote:
Hello guys, I totally agree with last 2 David posts.
I'm responsible for the messaging and transactions platform/infrastructure
in Movile.com.
For the last 9 years we tried almost all brokers possibilities, ibm,
hornetq, amq, openmq, rabbitmq, sqs, etc, etc. And all kind of
integrations/structures/languages/protocols/etc.
We are running about 150 billion msgs/year, almost 100% in hornetq(70%) and
websphere mq(25%). And these middlewares were chosen for really good
technical reasons.
My opinion:
hornetq core + improvements(already done in this "amq rc") + compatibility
with amq5.
It's awesome, can't be better. What doubts do you still have about this? I
agree that Amq5 and its community have merits, but it needs a new core, and
I can't see better opportunity.
Is it reasonable to have 2 apache brokers?
Performance/Integrity/Stability/Compatibility
Regards,
Daniel La Laina
sent from s4
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-HornetQ-ActiveMQ-s-next-generation-tp4693781p4693862.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
