Hi Rajith, I know you've been working on getting a "JMS client over messaging API" working, but this is the first I realized that the intention was to add *another* Java client for 0.18.
the goal of JMS on top of messaging on top of proton makes a lot of sense... I'm less convinced that JMS on top of the current C++ client makes a lot of sense - especially without a wider discussion on the list amongst all the Java developers. Perfectly happy to have this in some sort of sandbox for people to download and try out (if they really need a JMS over RDMA client or something)... but I think adding it to the main release artefacts for 0.18 would be confusing and likely to leave us with more future support problems. -- Rob On 18 June 2012 17:00, Rajith Attapattu <rajit...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > I've been working on providing a Java version of the Qpid API (QPID-4001) > For starters I have experimented on implementing this API over the > existing C++ client via SWIG/JNI until we get a pure Java > implementation based on Rob Godfrey's proton-j work. > > There are some unique benefits provided by the above approach. > 1. Allow us to leverage the arguable more performant and stable c++ client. > 2. If we get a JMS layer over this, it can provide a reasonable > alternative for the current JMS client, until we rework the client > properly. > 3. RDMA support for the Java client. > > The work I have done lives in the following branch [1] > At the moment it has full support for message headers, String, List > and Map messages. > I have a working example here [2] that demonstrates the above. > Instructions on how to run the example is here [3]. > > I'm hoping to get this on trunk in time for 0-18 provided the > following goals are met. > > 1. Successful review of the c++ components [will post the details shortly]. > 2. Agreement on QPID-4001 (will post the latest shortly) > 3. Successful review of the common java code in the implementation > layer [need to think on how best to put this up for review]. > 4. Adding a reasonable amount of unit tests for the java side. > > I would really appreciate if interested parties have a look at the > review requests and provide feedback/suggestions to make this a > reality. > I will be posting relative performance numbers once I get the chance > to do a reasonable performance evaluation comparing this work with the > current c++ client and JMS client. > > Regards, > > Rajith > > [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/branches/address-refactor2/ > [2] > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/branches/address-refactor2/qpid/java/client-api/src/main/java/org/apache/qpid/messaging/cpp/CppTest.java > [3] > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/qpid/branches/address-refactor2/qpid/java/client-api/README > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qpid.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qpid.apache.org
