qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Godfrey <rob.j.godf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Persistant Publish Subscribe mechanism in Qpid
Date Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:08:40 GMT
I would certainly agree that currently we have more experience with the BDB
based store - it also (last time I checked it) gave much better performance
also... so for those two reasons I would currently recommend it over the
Derby store in production use.  The Derby store is probably easier to query
directly and to have a look at the data inside however.

-- Rob



2009/10/14 Marnie McCormack <marnie.mccormack@googlemail.com>

> My view is that we recommend BDB, simply because we know that it performs
> under heavy load. I'm not sure what kind of
> robustness/performance/reliability tests have been run on Derby - anyone ?
>
> Marnie
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Robert Greig <robert.j.greig@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > 2009/10/13 Martin Ritchie <ritchiem@apache.org>:
> >
> > > There is some detail in our FAQ but I've updated our lt to include
> > > links to the Derby Message Store for providing Apache Licensed
> > > persistence and is bundled with the recent releases. The only cavet is
> > > that it has not had as much reported testing.
> >
> > Just to clear for our users - are we recommending the Derby store or
> > the BDB store for production use?
> >
> > RG
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> > Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
> > Use/Interact: mailto:users-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
> >
> >
>

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