Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86C08200D2F for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 00:08:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 856881609EC; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:08:15 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id CAF321609EB for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 00:08:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 17375 invoked by uid 500); 17 Oct 2017 22:08:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 17364 invoked by uid 99); 17 Oct 2017 22:08:13 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:08:13 +0000 Received: from mail-oi0-f53.google.com (mail-oi0-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id C9B141A02CD for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:08:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f53.google.com with SMTP id h6so5738748oia.10 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 15:08:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaXAQHFpcN28K7FtT16r3OTdkx174PCiMKkKLdXSSY93BK7L3Li6 xRk+Z1X17ZPF6r2uxLyrHxvZCQhTQocRpSN2SFr/lg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+RCRNvZu4vuepIvlQ3rv4LFwd9rjmcxebru84H38VKUemwmKWx4Yjqbe8nn9hOYDQb7I+fYWxXSSfEoZHPwrMA= X-Received: by 10.202.208.74 with SMTP id h71mr8415612oig.420.1508278091063; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 15:08:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.74.139.53 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 15:08:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1508272601975-0.post@n4.nabble.com> References: <1507849707323-0.post@n4.nabble.com> <1507923169503-0.post@n4.nabble.com> <1508272601975-0.post@n4.nabble.com> From: Justin Bertram Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 17:08:10 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Message redelivery when producer broker killed (without persistence) To: users@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11412724d73893055bc55bea" archived-at: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:08:15 -0000 --001a11412724d73893055bc55bea Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I don't think of Artemis as "not really prime-time ready yet." The Artemis code-base was based on the HornetQ message broker which has served commercially as the JMS implementation in Red Hat's JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) 6.x since 2012. Artemis itself has served in the same capacity in EAP 7.x since May of last year. Artemis is also the message broker at the heart of Red Hat's JBoss AMQ 7.x product released in May of this year. All three of these are used in production situations of all kinds where performance and stability are critical. That is, of course, not to mention all the users who have deployed into production using the bits straight from Apache without commercial support. I'm curious. Where did you hear that Artemis wasn't really ready for prime time? Justin On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:36 PM, pypen wrote: > Thanks guys. > I am a little hesitant since I heard that artemis is not really prime-time > ready yet. > But I might give it a shot. > > > > -- > Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User- > f2341805.html > --001a11412724d73893055bc55bea--