streams-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Danny Sullivan <dsulliv...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: Use of ActiveMQ
Date Thu, 19 Sep 2013 20:19:42 GMT
Good to know, thanks for the info!

> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 16:17:52 -0400
> Subject: Re: Use of ActiveMQ
> From: jletourneau80@gmail.com
> To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
> 
> Yeah that stuff too ;)
> 
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Chris Geer <chris@cxtsoftware.com> wrote:
> > Failover, load_balancing......
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Jason Letourneau
> > <jletourneau80@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Performance more than anything for passing between components but also
> >> for advanced messaging patterns or systems that might be interested in
> >> wiretapping the JMS queues - http would lock us into point to point
> >> messaging between all the components, though I guess you could just
> >> add multiple outbound routes for http...
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Danny Sullivan <dsullivan7@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hey Everyone,
> >> > Is there a reason to use ActiveMQ in Streams at all? I noticed the
> >> following in the streamsCamelContext.xml:
> >> > <!--split activities on Q, waiting for aggregation -->        <route>
> >>          <from uri="direct:activityQ"/>            <inOnly
> >> uri="activemq:queue:activities"/>        </route>
> >> >         <route>            <from uri="activemq:queue:activities"/>
> >>      <aggregate completionInterval="500" groupExchanges="true">
> >>    <correlationExpression>                    <constant>true</constant>
> >>            </correlationExpression>                <bean
> >> ref="activityService" method="receiveExchange"/>            </aggregate>
> >>      </route>
> >> >
> >> > I replace this with the following and got the same functionality:
> >> > <!--split activities on Q, waiting for aggregation -->        <route>
> >>          <from uri="direct:activityQ"/>            <aggregate
> >> completionInterval="500" groupExchanges="true">
> >>  <correlationExpression>                    <constant>true</constant>
> >>          </correlationExpression>                <bean
> >> ref="activityService" method="receiveExchange"/>            </aggregate>
> >>      </route>
> >> > This makes sense conceptually because what we currently have is a POST
> >> method reaching the server and being sent to the same server via JMS. Is
> >> there a reason to use a messaging system rather than have the streams sent
> >> and received via http? Either Camel or Spring MVC should be able to
> >> accomplish this. What I'd like to do is set up single endpoints for
> >> publisher registration, subscriber registration, publishing streams, and
> >> receiving streams in Camel (because Storm unfortunately doesn't look like
> >> it provides support for http routing). Storm would process all the data
> >> coming in from Camel and output it to the Cassandra DB. Receiving streams
> >> would operate much in the same way it currently does: by refreshing the
> >> stream from the database.
> >> > Danny
> >>
 		 	   		  
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message