camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "prasun.sultania" <prasun.sulta...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Difference Between ActiveMQ and Camel
Date Thu, 31 May 2012 18:42:52 GMT
@Sully You mean to say is that, Camel provides an integration with message
producer Application and the JMS Broker ActiveMQ? It acts as a bridge
between the two, while providing Integration services defined in EIP and
hiding the complexity of writing a JMS Client from scratch?

@Donald you mean that camel provides a better connectivity for message
producers, and ActiveMQ has got better way of handling Consumers.I mean
Camel can route a message from Consumer to JMS provider, but ActiveMQ can
assure more reliable delivery of messages to consumers?

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:57 PM, sully6768 [via Camel] <
ml-node+s465427n5713799h55@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> My short summary,
>
> ActiveMQ is an open source, enterprise messaging provider that conforms to
> the JMS 1.1 specification.
>
> Camel is an open source integration framework.  At its core it is an
> implementation of Enterprise Integration
> Patterns<http://www.enterpriseintegrationpatterns.com/>(EIP) by Gregor
> Hohpe upon which numerous folks around the planet have
> added integration consumer and producer extensions that provide the
> connectivity options for the EIP message channels.
>
> As such, Camel would provide the integration layer to ActiveMQ in place of
> hand writing the JMS clients.
>
> Does that help?
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Donald Whytock <[hidden email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5713799&i=0>>
> wrote:
>
> > My understanding is that ActiveMQ can serve as a host for JMS message
> > queues, supporting applications that use them.  Camel isn't meant as a
> > host for JMS queueing as much as a listener to a JMS queue.
> >
> > Don
> >
> > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:34 PM, prasun.sultania
> > <[hidden email] <http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5713799&i=1>>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am a beginner. I have a very question to ask:
> > >
> > > Camel has got almost all the components described in EIP such as
> message
> > > routing, Point to Point Channel and Publish-Subscribe channel.
> > >
> > > Still why do we need ActiveMQ when Camel has got everything?
> > > What difference does ActiveMQ makes?
> > >
> > > --
> > > View this message in context:
> >
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Difference-Between-ActiveMQ-and-Camel-tp5713797.html
> > > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Scott England-Sullivan
> ----------------------------------
> FuseSource
> Web:     http://www.fusesource.com
> Blog:     http://sully6768.blogspot.com
> Twitter: sully6768
> --
> Scott England-Sullivan
> ----------------------------------
> FuseSource
> Web:     http://www.fusesource.com
> Blog:     http://sully6768.blogspot.com
> Twitter: sully6768
>
>
> ------------------------------
>  If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
>
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Difference-Between-ActiveMQ-and-Camel-tp5713797p5713799.html
>  To unsubscribe from Difference Between ActiveMQ and Camel, click here<http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=5713797&code=cHJhc3VuLnN1bHRhbmlhQGdtYWlsLmNvbXw1NzEzNzk3fDM2MTc2NDYwMw==>
> .
> NAML<http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>


--
View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Difference-Between-ActiveMQ-and-Camel-tp5713797p5713801.html
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message