FWIW- An offline KahaDB export / Artemis Journal import tool was an idea
I added to the wiki page Bruce setup. Maintaining messageId I think is
the most critical element, and we could leave behind things like
incomplete transactions, message groups, etc.
On 12/7/17 10:00 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 9:57 PM Bruce Snyder <[email protected]> wrote:
I have suggested a similar tool that will read the ActiveMQ 5.x XML
configuration and convert it to an equivalent Artemis config. I think this
would be easier to create than making Artemis read ActiveMQ 5.x configs.
For some reason I thought that Artemis supported KahaDB, but I'm not sure
where I got this. I thought I read it somewhere. I wonder how difficult it
would be to make Artemis support KahaDB as it is still the fastest message
store, correct?
Artemis journal it’s faster. We don’t currently support KahaDB.
Bruce
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Christopher Shannon <
[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for getting this started Bruce.
The migration portion is going to be tricky and we need to discuss more
how
to handle it. Maybe we need to write a tool to help convert the old 5.x
XML config to the Artemis config or update Artemis to be able to read a
5.x
style config. Obviously not everything will translate directly so that
would need to be figured out.
For the datastore we have a tool that will export KahaDB to XML that can
then be imported by Artemis but this could probably be improved even more
to make it more automated.
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Justin Bertram <[email protected]>
wrote:
Thanks, Bruce!
Justin
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Bruce Snyder <[email protected]>
wrote:
I have added the following statement to the first paragraph in the
wiki
page:
The overall objective for working toward feature parity between
ActiveMQ 5.x and Artemis is for Artemis to eventually become ActiveMQ
6.x.
Bruce
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Justin Bertram <[email protected]>
wrote:
Would it be possible to clarify what, if anything, will happen if
Artemis
achieves the described level of feature parity with ActiveMQ 5.x?
In
other
words, what is the goal of Artemis' feature parity with 5.x? I
think a
broader road-map like that would really help the community as they
could
look at the Artemis road-map and see that they can help achieve the
goal
(whatever that is) by helping to implement feature X or Y.
Justin
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Bruce Snyder <
[email protected]
wrote:
I have created a page on the wiki for the Artemis Roadmap here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ACTIVEMQ/
ActiveMQ+Artemis+Roadmap
The goal of this page is stated at the top: to identify the
outstanding
issues that must be addressed by Artemis in order to achieve some
level
of
feature parity with ActiveMQ 5.x.
I encourage everyone to contribute to this page and to discuss
this
roadmap
on this list.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\
"YC;VT*"
);'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ <http://bruceblog.org/>
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
--
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ <http://bruceblog.org/>
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
--
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*" );'
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ <http://bruceblog.org/>
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
