activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From mffrench <>
Subject Re: actual status of activeMQ and AMQP
Date Mon, 23 Mar 2009 17:30:50 GMT


As you maybe know the future AMQP 1.0 release is out of the box soon
And as you maybe notice too a famous IT enterprise work now on the AMQP
specification : Microsoft. So it's now more only a redhat businnes (in fact
as far I know it never was ...) .

I've some question on how AMQP will be implemented in ActiveMQ. As you said
the AMQP specification is particularly founding : I mean it's implementation
will have an eavy impact on the queuer core and so it's not only a wire
protocol. That's why I understand when you say "The AMQP reality is that
only new message brokers will implement it". So the question is : do you
plan to rewrite ActiveMQ core ? If not how do you plan to add this connector

About restful you maybe notice that there is some effort on AMQP to
integrate a restMS system ( into the protocol
... What do you think about ? Could it be a good solution for your restful

Finally I would be very interested to know the state of your osgi
implementation progress... I've already the trunk source code of ActiveMQ
but I didn't see anything for the moment related to OSGI. I would be very
interested to help you because it will be certainly a work I will have to do
for my firm... Is there any specification or documentation about it to get
me started ?

Thanks for all

rajdavies wrote:
> The Architecture for ActiveMQ 6 is designed to be flexible and  
> extensible. Its being built on an OSGI kernel -
> .
> With the input of SonicMQ architects - we are building out the  
> enterprise class features of ActiveMQ, but we will be accommodating  
> more wire formats - including AMQP -as well as true restful API.
> On 8 Mar 2009, at 04:59, bwtaylor wrote:
>> There is more noise again around my shop regarding AMQP. The "AMPQ  
>> == RedHat"
>> assertion doesn't play because you've got RabbitMQ and Qpid. Yes, QPid
>> started as a Red Hat code drop, but everybody understands that  
>> Apache is
>> robust to domination by any one vendor, a fact that ApacheMQ and  
>> Camel both
>> demonstrate well. But even if what you say is true, if Red Hat is  
>> the only
>> vendor that comes forward with a solution for them, that's not a  
>> good place
>> for you to be. Nobody fears Red Hat lock in.
>> I do not need AMQP per se: what I need is high quality cross platform
>> messaging. So if you've changed your plans and aren't going to  
>> tackle AMQP
>> because it isn't simple to implement for existing broker platforms,  
>> why not
>> team up with the folks you mention and come up with something that  
>> is. I
>> expect that the reason the AMQP spec writers didn't come up with a  
>> solution
>> that could be bolted on to existing brokers is because they got the  
>> cold
>> shoulder from the projects you listed.
>> STOMP is not the answer. It's too simplistic and asking ruby and  
>> python apps
>> to confine their messaging capabilities to what STOMP provides is  
>> met with
>> the same enthusiasm you'd get asking java shops to give up JMS for  
>> it. The
>> stomp python clients all have various states of disrepair. The ruby  
>> one
>> works, but there's critical unresolved bugs related to activemq's  
>> stomp
>> implementation anyhow: AMQ-2137, AMQ-1941, AMQ-1873, AMQ-1807. Also  
>> stomp
>> won't have keep alive until v1.1 (AMQ-2019). We've seen this leak  
>> sockets to
>> the point where we hit the ulimit max and our broker hangs.
>> rajdavies wrote:
>>> The AMQP reality is that only new message brokers will implement it -
>>> simply because you'd have to re-write the message broker to
>>> accommodate it. Which is why you won't see any of the traditional
>>> messaging platforms  like Webshpere MQ, SonicMQ or Tibco EMS, RV
>>> implementing any time soon. We would love to offer full support for  
>>> it
>>> in ActiveMQ  - but that's going to take  lot of investment and a lot
>>> of work.
>>> Its a shame the AMQP spec writers didn't concentrate on making AMQP
>>> simple to use and implement for existing messaging platforms in the
>>> same way STOMP did - which is why both OpenMQ and RabbitMQ  support
>>> STOMP - and SonicMQ will probably being doing the same in the future
>>> too.
>>> The AMQP protocol is open argument kinda disappears up its own
>>> backside once folks realize the cost of entry - that a vendor has to
>>> start from scratch to implement it - so in reality AMQP == RedHat
>>> currently for enterprises.  Ironic - when the whole point of AMQP was
>>> to try break vendor lock-in!
>>> cheers,
>>> Rob
>>> Rob Davies
>>> On 26 Jan 2009, at 18:49, bwtaylor wrote:
>>>> I'll also express strong interest in AMQP and I'll take the liberty
>>>> of saying
>>>> that most people using stomp for cross platform integration with
>>>> ActiveMQ
>>>> should be expressing interest. With the influx of enterprise apps
>>>> being
>>>> written in dynamic languages, AMQP offers high end messaging
>>>> features in a
>>>> platform agnostic way.
>>>> I would also caution against assuming that the people who want AMQP
>>>> for
>>>> messaging are likely to seek you out to express that interest. If
>>>> I'm a ruby
>>>> on rails or a django shop and I figure out I need a messaging
>>>> solution for
>>>> cross platform integration, I'll soon have an interest in AMQP.
>>>> When I look
>>>> for implementations I'll find RabbitMQ or Redhat Messaging, or  
>>>> AMQP in
>>>> Fedora 10 and never think about ActiveMQ.
>>>> In fact, if you don't support AMQP that will be a talking point
>>>> against
>>>> deploying ActiveMQ in an IT environment where ruby or python apps
>>>> exist.
>>>> I've already had that happen at my company and I've played down AMQP
>>>> as
>>>> still in development, not quite fully baked, but now with Fedora 10
>>>> touting
>>>> AMQP as a major new feature, that argument's lifespan is ending and
>>>> people
>>>> are becoming more aware of it.
>>>> James.Strachan wrote:
>>>>> 2008/12/19 loctorp <>:
>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>> I was wondering about the current status of AMQP implementation 

>>>>>> into
>>>>>> acticeMQ. On the project page it states, that there is a sandbox
>>>>>> version
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> that developement has been paused.
>>>>>> As we are interested in using activeMQ together with AMQP we were
>>>>>> wondering
>>>>>> if this status has changed and/or are interested in the up-to-date
>>>>>> outlook.
>>>>> The status hasn't changed since that wiki page was written.  
>>>>> Welcome -
>>>>> you're the first person ever to express any interest in AMQP with
>>>>> ActiveMQ :)
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> James
>>>>> -------
>>>>> Open Source Integration
>>>> -- 
>>>> View this message in context:
>>>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at
>> -- 
>> View this message in context:
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at

View this message in context:
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at

View raw message