qpid-proton mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Ross <tr...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: new team working with AMQP and Apache Qpid Proton
Date Thu, 17 Apr 2014 13:50:19 GMT
Rob and team,

Thanks for the introduction and welcome to the project.

The mission of Qpid Proton is to encourage adoption of AMQP and to make
it as easy as possible to integrate AMQP into anything and everything.
As such, I think your goals are in alignment with the project's goals.

I'll address your specific questions in-line below:

On 04/17/2014 08:36 AM, Rob Nicholson wrote:
> Hello proton mailing list. 
> 
> I think that some folks here have noticed that within IBM we have an 
> incubator project called MQ Light [1] which is using the AMQP 1.0 wire 
> protocol and is making use of Apache Qpid Proton both standalone[1] and in 
> our cloud PaaS incubator [2]. 
> Up until this point we have been largely in listen mode on the mailing 
> list but now we will be engaging with the community so we thought it would 
> be polite to introduce ourselves, what we are doing and how we are 
> thinking of engaging with you.
> 
> Currently we use the proton C messenger API in our client and the Java 
> messaging API in our "server" which uses code derived from IBM's Websphere 
> MQ products. 
> 
> We have raised some Jiras, we plan to raise more for some specific 
> problems we have had, supplying patches which show how we worked around or 
> addressed each problem we had. 
> 
> We also have some of more strategic queries the first of which are:
> 
>  - We are finding that we need to extend Messenger in order to make it 
> capable of doing what we want it to. Is this valid or did you want to keep 
> messenger really simple.   Should we just supply patches for these 
> extensions also? 

Others have also identified gaps in Messenger, specifically in allowing
it to be integrated into an existing program's poll loop and to run
asynchronously.

We always welcome patches, but this is a case where a discussion of the
gaps you've identified is appropriate so we can arrive at a solution
that solves the real problems without muddying the API.

> 
> -  We want to create language bindings for MQ Light which are _really_ 
> easy to use by programmers in that language. Specifically we find these 
> bindings need to understand our messaging model. AMQP does not have a 
> preconceived idea of a messaging model. We would like to put all of the 
> client code into open source but do these language bindings belong in the 
> Proton project? If not, I suspect we'll create a separate project which 
> has a dependency to proton. 

It is in AMQP's best interest for there to be freely available bindings
that are easy to use.  It is also consistent with Qpid's purpose to have
them hosted here.

I'd like to understand more about the implications of your messaging
model and whether clients built for that model can be used with other
messaging services.  Such a conversation would help determine whether
these clients belong in Proton or as a separate sub-project.

> 
> -  As we have consumed the Java engine API we have run up against some 
> threading issues. This might be because we do not understand the threading 
> model in the Engine.  At some point we'd like to have a design discussion 
> with the community on the threading model in the Engine implementation. 

There is at least one team within Red Hat that has also identified
threading and performance issues with the Proton-J engine.  We should
work together to identify and fix the problems.

> 
> 
> [1] https://www.ibmdw.net/messaging/mq-light/
> [2] http://www.bluemix.net
> [3] https://www.npmjs.org/package/mqlight
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rob Nicholson
> CEng MEng FBCS CITP
> 
> 

-Ted

Mime
View raw message