activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From gonzus <gonzalo.dieth...@diethelm.org>
Subject Re: Any advantage in using Spring?
Date Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:28:48 GMT

Hello Bruce, thanks for your response.


bsnyder wrote:
> 
> I have always recommended the use of the Spring Framework for building
> Java apps. It's diminishes the complexity of the application and provides
> many well-tested, widely used convenience classes. In fact, ActiveMQ
> itself is built on top of the Spring Framework.
> 

Ok, this is exactly the kind of opinion / information I was looking for.
Thanks for sharing it.


bsnyder wrote:
> 
> One item I stress to my customers is not to create homegrown JMS clients
> unless you have an extremely good reason for doing so. When creating
> homegrown JMS clients you need to worry about creating your own
> MessageProducers and MessageConsumers, you must manually manage
> concurrency, transactionality, and resources. The biggest mistake people
> make is underestimating the level of effort and time this involves. The
> complexity in creating homegrown JMS clients far outweighs adopting the
> tools in the Spring JMS APIs such as the JmsTemplate and the message
> listener containers.
> 

Check. I would conclude, then, that when one develops a JMS client with
Spring, one can also use all of the other niceties associated with Spring:
ease of configuration, POJOs, orthogonal transactions and logging, etc. Is
this right?


bsnyder wrote:
> 
> In a situation where you might be switching between JMS providers, the
> biggest advantage to using the Spring JMS APIs is that you don't need to
> rewrite your JMS clients. The Spring JMS APIs will work with any JMS
> compliant provider. The work to switch between JMS providers includes
> first changing the connection factory that is specific to a JMS provider,
> and then testing that the configuration utilized from the Spring JMS APIs
> (e.g., caching, concurrent consumers, task executors, etc.) are
> appropriate for the new JMS provider.
> 

Excellent news. I found what I must suppose was an old article on Spring JMS
that confused me into thinking the people at the Spring project were
implementing their own flavor of ActiveMQ (that is, a new, complete JMS
provider); your statement confirms that this is not the case, and that
Spring JMS is a wrapper around the JMS API, that could be used with any JMS
provider. Is this correct?


bsnyder wrote:
> 
>> On the minus side, would I be likely to fall into any pitfalls by using
>> Spring?
> 
> Not particularly. As a testament to it's extraordinarily widespread
> adoption and incredible flexibility, the Spring Framework has been
> deployed with all the application servers and web containers in existence
> as well as with POJO-based applications, too. I've always been very
> surprised how far and wide I've seen the Spring Framework used on my
> travels as a consultant over the years.
> 

How about some performance concerns stated in the ActiveMQ web site, where
it says that when you use Spring you might be creating and destroying most /
all of your JMS objects almost indiscriminately, rather than pooling and
reusing them? If this is really a problem with Spring JMS, and ActiveMQ has
a solution for it, would this solution work across all JMS providers (should
I decide to switch)?

Thanks again and best regards.
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Any-advantage-in-using-Spring--tp25088551p25095336.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message