| Author |
Message
|
| skydoor |
 Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:29 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
Hi All,
We have third party enterprises who do not want to purchase the WMQ license but we require a messaging solution for all integration to third parties. We therefore require an open source messaging solution that will integrate well with WMQ.
I have had a look at ActiveMQ and JBOSS Messaging but to be honest, I have not had much success in integrating it with WMQ.
I would like to know the opinion of all and sundry as to which open source messaging product is the best and easiest/well documented to implement.
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| exerk |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
Stick in a gateway and have them use client?
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skydoor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:07 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
Hi exerk,
I proposed that but was shot down promptly...
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
Well, if they don't like the answer, perhaps they should come up with a better solution 
Sounds like a case of 'thank you for your technical input, but we're not interested in it'.
EDIT: Seems that Apache recommend ServiceMix (an ESB) to integrate different providers, so is your shop prepared to maintain two different products to achieve the same thing?
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skydoor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:46 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
I am actually looking forward to the technical challenge of it but I do agree with your assessment. The more correct statement would be: they don't like the answer so I must come up with a better solution.
I have had a look at ServiceMix but it seems to be a complex framework to basically run what is essentially a 'qmgr'. I would like to run say activeMQ on it's own and integrate with that. That would be first prize but the documentation to create JMS bridges and more specifically JMS bridges to WMQ is scarce.
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:57 am Post subject: Re: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| skydoor wrote: |
| ...The more correct statement would be: they don't like the answer so I must come up with a better solution... |
There's a better solution than our favourite product! 
| skydoor wrote: |
| ...documentation to create JMS bridges and more specifically JMS bridges to WMQ is scarce... |
Do you need to bridge it? Can not ActiveMQ strap straight into a queue manager as a JMS client? A V7.0 gateway still sounds highly attractive to me.
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skydoor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:08 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
It can possibly strap on as a client, although I don't know how to do that.
What do you mean with a V7.0 gateway? I have no knowledge of that, apologies.
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
V7.0 Gateway means you create a Queue Manager running on MQ 7.0 in your datacenter. Make it Highly Available using hardware clustering. Its a "gateway" into your infrastructure. Since its a single QM into your world, you secure that QM tight as a drum.
The partners should use the FREE and FULLY SUPPORTED MQ Client to connect to your Queue Manager. While we typically don't like to use clients between B2B (Queue Manager to Queue Manager is much more robust), MQ Clients are going to be way more reliable than any open source kludgy bridge to MQ.
If they keep asking questions, tell them the answer is 42.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:29 am Post subject: Re: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| skydoor wrote: |
It can possibly strap on as a client, although I don't know how to do that.
What do you mean with a V7.0 gateway? I have no knowledge of that, apologies. |
Sorry, poor terminology on my part. What I meant was connect to, and use. Notwithstanding that, the comment from my esteemed colleague says it all...
...take a towel if you have to 
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skydoor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:36 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
Raait. We have a qmgr in a DMZ which is the one I wanted to use when I proposed the client solution. The argument on their side is that they want the ability to queue messages at the third party site if the connection is down.
I did give them the standard answer but due to the Dilbert principle all I got was a blank stare. (Possibly thinking I have gone mad...)
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skydoor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:37 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
exerk - I always have my towel, but corporate convention forbids me to use it as a lethal weapon.
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skydoor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 5:00 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
mqjeff - I thought of that one but the doc states that it is not recommended where guaranteed delivery is needed, so I scrapped that one.
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 5:05 am Post subject: Re: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| skydoor wrote: |
| ...The argument on their side is that they want the ability to queue messages at the third party site if the connection is down... |
Then ActiveMQ/JBOSS/whatever will have to provide that facility, and your DMZ queue manager is still usable as a Gateway. They can't have it all ways...next thing they'll be asking is for you to chisel off the electrons on the platters when a queue manager goes down - because they want their messages now 
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skydoor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 5:34 am Post subject: WMQ ActiveMQ JBOSS Messaging |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 43
Location: Cape Town
|
The idea is that activeMQ or something else will then give you a messaging platform to store messages while the connection is down. Yea, it's a tough one. It will be a nice achievement to get going though.
Any other ideas/recommendations/links to read out there?
_________________
The answer to the question is 42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
