geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From founder_chen <>
Subject Re: Who are working on the JMS integration
Date Tue, 02 Sep 2003 11:43:34 GMT

Yeah, The JMS interface is for application programming
code, and the JCA is used to integrate a JMS provider
in to an application server.

In the Book <<Addison Wesley - J2EE Connector
Architecture and Enterprise Application Integration>>
, Chapter 6.6.1:
"A JMS provider implements the JMS API for an
enterprise messaging system and provides access to the
services provided by the underlying message system.
Vendors who provide application servers also include a
JMS provider implementation as part of an application
server. Currently, a JMS provider is plugged in to an
application server in a vendor-specific manner. The
Connector architecture 2.0 version defines a standard
for plugging a JMS provider in to an application
server. This standard means that a JMS provider can be
similarly to a resource adapter in terms of the
system-level contracts that are based on the Connector
architecture 2.0 version. However, a JMS provider will
have a JMS API as a client API for its underlying
messaging system."

So we can take a look at the JCA spec, and make sure
if there is already a definition for plugging a JMS
provider in the latest JCA spec(1.5)


-----Original Email-----
Sender: Stefan Schuster [] 
Time: 2003年9月2日 19:10
Subject: Re: Who are working on the JMS integration

The JMS Interface is what you are using 
in th application code (createQueue....)

The JCA is one possible interface to
use for integration in the app-server.

JNDI is what you use to find the ConnectionFactory
etc. OpenJMS comes with its own JNDI provider.
To integrate it into geronimo, we would bind
the ConnectionFactory etc in our own JNDI namespace.
Then, when it is looked up by an application,
we use JCA to construct the requested 
JMS provider.

Hope that is correct and helped you understanding
the interfaces. If anything is wrong or unclear
please tell !!

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 12:51, Thies Edeling wrote:
> > Stefan Schuster wrote:
> >
> > >Maybe we should take a look at more JMS provider
> > implementations than just openJMS see what they
> > using as an interface to the j2ee server, so we
> > >can pick an interface that is supported by as
> > >providers as possible.
> >
> > But most message broker vendors provide
> > vendor-specific APIs, These APIs are specific to a
> > message broker product and require an in-depth
> > knowledge
> > of the message broker. Such requirements add to
> > complexity of building these vendor-specific
> > and also lock us using a particular vendor.
> > So I think it is hard to pick an interface that is
> > supported by as many providers as possible.
> If the message broker is JMS compliant it implements
the JMS API's. Or am
> I mixing up the JMS API's with API's for integration
> reg,
> Thies

Do You Yahoo!? 

View raw message