activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Shannon <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Amazon MQ
Date Fri, 08 Dec 2017 16:33:46 GMT
Have you tried searching with bing?

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Justin Bertram <jbertram@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 <hzbarcea@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 <hzbarcea@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 <tbain@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
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message