| Author |
Message
|
| chauhan_maneesh |
 Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:18 pm Post subject: JMS or MQI |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 3
|
Hi All,
As i am begineer to the IBM-MQSeries , i have some questions on the same
1. Which is better approach to interact with the MQ-Server JMS API or MQI
2. I need to make a java program that interacts with the MQ-Series Server , did i need to install the MQ-Client to the machine on my system
Thanks in advance for your prompt answer
Maneesh Chauhan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:42 pm Post subject: Re: JMS or MQI |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| chauhan_maneesh wrote: |
| 1. Which is better approach to interact with the MQ-Server JMS API or MQI |
JMS is a standard, MQI is an api. Which is better depends on what you're trying to do, your skill set, prefered programming language, etc. Note that for non-Java apps there's an extension called XMS available.
| chauhan_maneesh wrote: |
2. I need to make a java program that interacts with the MQ-Series Server , did i need to install the MQ-Client to the machine on my system
|
Yes
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| chauhan_maneesh |
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 3
|
| In terms of performance , which is better JMS or MQI |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| chauhan_maneesh wrote: |
| In terms of performance , which is better JMS or MQI |
I don't believe there's a significant difference in performance between the two methods - I'll let others with more experience correct me.
It's more a question of feature, familiarity (do you Java people already know JMS for instance), maintainability, etc, etc.
IMHO it's not a question of "which is better" but "which is better for you".
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
There is a difference in performance. JMS is slower.
Depending on how badly you code it can of course affect how MUCH slower.
In general, very very very very few applications are actually going to have performance requirements that will make it necessary to use the plain Java API rather than JMS.
And likely those apps would be written in C in the first place.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| And likely those apps would be written in C in the first place. |
I didn't want to say that; sounded too much like "C is faster, neater, better and just plain nicer than Java".
Which of course it is!! 
(Accusations of bias may have some foundation in truth  )
(Yes, I am a C coder. Yes, I can only just write "Hello World" apps in Java).
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| chauhan_maneesh |
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 3
|
| Can any one help me from where i should get the MQI API |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| chauhan_maneesh wrote: |
| Can any one help me from where i should get the MQI API |
Comes with the product. Application Programming Guide / Reference describes it, along with the Using Java / Using C++ / Using .Net manuals (depending on language.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
| You don't need the full MQ client software installed for Java programs to work with MQ. Just the appropriate MQ JAR files are enough. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| zpat wrote: |
| You don't need the full MQ client software installed for Java programs to work with MQ. Just the appropriate MQ JAR files are enough. |
It may work, but is it a supported IBM configuration?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
For many years these JAR files were distributed separately from the MQ client. I am only pointing out a fact, not recommending it.
Generally speaking it's "safer" to deploy Java MQ applications with the exact same MQ JAR files that they were developed with, rather than risking incompatibilities with whatever MQ JAR files happen to be present on the client system.
On the other hand, this makes upgrading Java MQ clients a nightmare of tracking down these JAR files. It's a lose-lose! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Generally speaking, it's safer to develop MQ apps against the version of the client jars that are installed on production...
And then do any new version testing in dev/sit/uat/model/whatever.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
I still come across production messages that have come from MQ V2 JAR files (you can tell from the application name format).
Actually it would be very helpful for the exact MQ version that PUT the message to be recorded in the MQMD somewhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
This topic has come up on the list serve. An MQ Admin should be able to tell the MQ Client's MQ version either from the MQMD or from the connection handle.
Hursley is aware of the desire.
The topic of what needs to be distributed for Java MQ Clients has also been discussed.
http://www.mail-archive.com/mqseries@listserv.meduniwien.ac.at/msg09527.html
The fact that there can be a discussion at all is proof that the manuals are not clear on this point. And as zpat said, for years the MA88 support pack was the official way for JAVA apps to make MQ Client connections, and all they were was the jars. When IBM included those jars in the base product, there was never an announcement saying the jars alone wouldn't work.
I have dozens of apps developed during the MA88 days. Using just the jars they created the apps the official way, and have been working for years. You try telling those JAVA gurus that they now have to install a full client software, especially without any doc specifically saying the model has changed. They continue to use just the jars as they upgrade and there has never been a problem with functionality or support.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
