The core of the Artemis codebase is the HornetQ code that was donated to
the Apache foundation several years ago, so both codebases have had their
cores tested in production environments, and they've both had ongoing
development and bug fixes, which always opens up the possibility of
introducing
Can you please characterize the messages that are lost? Do you lose the
last few messages sent before the failover, or one here and there, or...?
Also, are you killing the broker gracefully (sending it a stop command) or
ungracefully (kill -9, etc.)? Might the messages that are lost simply be
the
AFAIK Artemis has been used with success in production in many cases: I
just think that is a matter of what you search in a broker.
Given that I'm biased toward performance I know what Artemis can deliver
from this pov and I can say that there is no really match (with many other
brokers) related
>From what I understand Artemis is still quite new and has not been used in
many production environments yet. ActiveMQ has been hardened for many years
in production, so that may be something that factors into your decision.
As for JMS2.0 you should look at whether 2.0 offers anything important
On 12/7/18 9:19 AM, kkaczkow wrote:
Hey guys!
I was wondering is there is any handicap related to using AMQP against
ActiveMQ instead of OpenWire? Also is using Apache Qpid, which implements
JMS 2.0, fully compatible with ActiveMQ 5?
When used against ActiveMQ 5.x brokers the Qpid JMS client
Hey guys!
I was wondering is there is any handicap related to using AMQP against
ActiveMQ instead of OpenWire? Also is using Apache Qpid, which implements
JMS 2.0, fully compatible with ActiveMQ 5?
Does anyone has any remarks about using Qpid against Artemis?
Cheers,
Konrad
--
Sent from:
Hello,
I want to use a JMS broker. So I have 2 options: Active MQ or ActiveMQ Artemis.
Reading some infos:
* ActiveMQ & ActiveMQ Artemis support the same protocols: Openwire,
Stomp, AMQP and MQTT but maybe not the same versions of those ones ?
* Active MQ is JMS 1.1 whereas
