On 12/08/2017 11:33 AM, Christopher Shannon wrote:
Have you tried searching with bing?
given the context of the thread maybe it'd be better to ask Alexa ?
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> wrote:
You can imagine that such organizations who make tons of investment in
ActiveMQ are not impressed by claims of 'better architecture' or my
'journaling system is faster'.
Do you have a list of what these companies are, in fact, impressed with? I
tried to Google for it but it didn't turn up much.
I think it would be good for you to interact more with other parts of RH.
Which parts of Red Hat do I need to interact with more? Please elaborate.
I need your help here.
Justin
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
What I know is exactly what I said: "effort was started part of the RH
partnership". I know very little about a partnership. The little I know I
cannot disclose and things change all the time anyway.
RH's strategy, like any other business is driven by sales. What I can
tell
you for instance that's public information is that the US (and other)
governments are heavy users of ActiveMQ (see USGS Earthquake Early
Warning
[1], bottom of page 12 or search for ActiveMQ). You can imagine that such
organizations who make tons of investment in ActiveMQ are not impressed
by
claims of 'better architecture' or my 'journaling system is faster'. It's
costs, training, a lot of factors to consider if you want to be
successful
(see why even the faster RabbitMQ struggles). ActiveMQ 5.x is very
reliable
when configured well. So it's no surprise that companies like Amazon
decide
the way they do.
We can talk more about what I see as a path to success and all, but I
think it would be good for you to interact more with other parts of RH.
My $0.02,
Hadrian
[1] https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2014/1097/pdf/ofr2014-1097.pdf
On 12/08/2017 09:38 AM, Justin Bertram wrote:
I'm not clear on what you're saying. Are you indicating that Amazon and
Red Hat are partnering on this venture for ActiveMQ 5.x in AWS?
Justin
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
I made some inquiries and have it on good authority that the AWS Managed
ActiveMQ effort was started part of the RH partnership [1]. So while
the
community was not contacted, AWS did talk to people with ActiveMQ
expertise. Now I am surprised that the RH people on this list didn't
know
about it (and given the inquiries I really believe they were not aware
of
that). RH is a large company and it looks like opinions (regarding
ActiveMQ) are as diverse as they are in this community.
Related to AWS, this was not a whim, an "it would be nice" sort of
service. They have serious interest from users. There is massive (and
increasing) interest in asynchronous messaging (see also Kafka,
RabbitMQ).
People make serious investments in such systems and the credibility of
the
community is super important.
Hadrian
[1] https://aws.amazon.com/partners/redhat/
On 11/28/2017 10:51 PM, Justin Bertram wrote:
I saw that announcement as well and was a bit puzzled by the lack of
any
involvement by Amazon in the community (at least that I could tell).
That
is, of course, their prerogative.
Since it's so unclear at this point how this potentially new user-base
might impact the community I don't see how it can factor in to the
road-map. It may complicate things; it may not. There may be renewed
interest in 5.x; there may not. Who's to say? In my opinion this
further
highlights the need to clearly define a project road-map. If such a
road-map had been defined 6-12 months ago maybe Amazon is making a
different announcement today.
Justin
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Tim Bain <tb...@alumni.duke.edu>
wrote:
Amazon announced today a service called Amazon MQ that allows ActiveMQ
5.x
to be run as a managed service in AWS:
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-mq-managed-message-
broker-service-for-activemq/
Was anyone on this list aware of that effort prior to this
announcement?
We should all be aware that there may be additional users coming to
ActiveMQ as a result of this service, who may have minimal experience
with
the configuration details of the broker and limited access to
detailed
troubleshooting information such as logs and JMX. This may complicate
or
delay the eventual sunsetting of 5.x in favor of Artemis; there may
be
interest in keeping 5.x alive for longer as a result of its use in
this
service.
Tim
--
Tim Bish
twitter: @tabish121
blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
