activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From kmansari <kamran_ans...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Concerns about ActiveMQ implementation over the WAN
Date Sat, 29 Sep 2012 05:12:44 GMT
Valid arguments, and well taken!

I think I like the idea of the REST interfaces more now than I did earlier,
especially because of the benefits of "remote governance" that it makes
possible. I am definitely going to sleep over it some more, and in the
meantime, I hope to hear from others that might be interested in adding
their thoughts/experiences to this discussion discussion.

As for the "knowing about each other" part, I wasn't implying that the
workers or worker-clusters have to know about each other, but precisely what
you said: that master has to know about worker endpoints, and vice-versa. I
guess I was trying to draw a contrast between the REST based approach, vs.
the broker grid approach where the master and workers know about the
brokers, and not about who they're communicating with. In other words, the
second approach provides a more decoupled framework than the first one. The
REST based architecture also doesn't lend itself very well to cases where
the master is required to broadcast a message to all workers (pub/sub) - not
an immediate requirement in my case, but not too far fetched either. Again,
like you said, there are always trade-offs when making these decisions.

Thanks once again - I definitely have more clarity now as to which approach
comes with what pros and cons. Please do add your thoughts if you have more
to share!

Regards,
-Kamran




--
View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Concerns-about-ActiveMQ-implementation-over-the-WAN-tp4657072p4657241.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Mime
View raw message