Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-qpid-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-qpid-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EC7A018853 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:28:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 69662 invoked by uid 500); 16 Feb 2016 18:28:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-qpid-users-archive@qpid.apache.org Received: (qmail 69629 invoked by uid 500); 16 Feb 2016 18:28:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@qpid.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@qpid.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@qpid.apache.org Received: (qmail 69618 invoked by uid 99); 16 Feb 2016 18:28:52 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:28:52 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id D0FABC0909 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:28:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.829 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.829 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_ASCII_DIVIDERS=0.8, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.329] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx2-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uiy0izwuP_Pz for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:28:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dc01p-em-mx01.saic.com (DC01P-EM-MX01.saic.com [139.121.216.25]) by mx2-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx2-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id C8A305FB65 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:28:49 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,456,1449554400"; d="scan'208";a="441405857" X-SAIC-EXTERNAL-IP: [10.16.180.55] Received: from unknown (HELO EM-EXMRP102.us.saic.com) ([10.16.180.55]) by dc01p-em-mx01.saic.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 16 Feb 2016 12:28:43 -0600 Received: from EM-EXMRP101.us.saic.com ([fe80::74da:8127:bd28:a960]) by EM-EXMRP102.us.saic.com ([fe80::a022:9677:ceb4:2196%24]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:28:43 -0600 From: "Flores, Paul A." To: "users@qpid.apache.org" Subject: RE: QPID C++ broker and Java - One broker to "rule them all" Thread-Topic: QPID C++ broker and Java - One broker to "rule them all" Thread-Index: AQHRaOSuEbaPIkEWf0umgeLSYyag8J8u+SMggAACUrE= Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:28:43 +0000 Message-ID: References: ,<00BCD2BEF4977149A7C7303B4BAEBBE621F0923B@ORD2MBX01E.mex05.mlsrvr.com> In-Reply-To: <00BCD2BEF4977149A7C7303B4BAEBBE621F0923B@ORD2MBX01E.mex05.mlsrvr.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.243.32.21] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Per Steve's advice: Environment: Centos 5.11 (moving soon to 7) C++: gcc 4.1.2 Java: 1.7.0_95 QPID Messaging API: qpid-cpp-0.34 C++ Broker ________________________________________ From: Steve Huston [shuston@riverace.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 12:13 PM To: users@qpid.apache.org Subject: RE: QPID C++ broker and Java - One broker to "rule them all" As long as the front end, back end, and broker can speak the same AMQP vers= ion, they should all play nice regardless of the programming language. If you can be a little more specific about the client code versions, it's h= ighly likely that someone can help point you to at least one broker to do t= he job. -Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: Flores, Paul A. [mailto:PAUL.A.FLORES@SAIC.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 1:06 PM > To: users@qpid.apache.org > Subject: QPID C++ broker and Java - One broker to "rule them all" > > Situation: > > > > I am looking at a mixed language implementation. > > > > Server side (backend) is in C++ while user facing side (frontend) is Java= . > > > > A fair amount of JNI "in play". > > > > Specific option of using JMS would be painful because there is a substant= ial > amount of backend communications between servers. > > > > Questions are straightforward. > > > > How do I get both sides (backend and frontend) to use the same Broker? > > > > Is JNI the only option? > > > > Insights and comments are welcomed and appreciated. > > > > Paul > > > > p.s. I apologize for the "Lord of the Rings" reference in subject line. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org= --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org