| Author |
Message
|
| ucbus1 |
 Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:56 pm Post subject: IBM MQ vs Oracle AQ |
 |
|
Knight
Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 560
|
All:
I know the general difference between IBM MQ and Oracle AQ.
1. IBM MQ is MOM based 1. Oralce AQ is database cluster based.
I need to have more details on one to one as regards to throughput, performance and some real data.
Could you please point me to right document/source that can provide the above details?
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| ucbus1 |
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 560
|
| Well.. I though I had initiated a hot discussion topic. Bit surprised to find that no one really evaluated the pros and cons of both. I have searched all over the forums could not come up wth a list. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
Contratulations! You have been designated to discover what the differences and similarities, and pros and cons are; then report back. 
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| ucbus1 wrote: |
| Well.. I though I had initiated a hot discussion topic. Bit surprised to find that no one really evaluated the pros and cons of both. I have searched all over the forums could not come up wth a list. |
Anyone on the board is going to be using the Websphere product set.
Until you convince us otherwise. Or not.
Those of us with WMQ, WMB and Oracle DBs await your findings with interest. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ucbus1 |
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 560
|
I have been using the Websphere stack and now I am asked to take a look at Oracle stack. Though convinced Websphere stack would be apt, can not overthorow Oracle, especially with limited knowledge. I am sure some of the forum members would have migrated otherway round ( Oracle to Websphere) and thought could get valuable insight. Anyways  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
Ignoring for a moment the love-affair we all have with MQ and the other products under the WebSphere umbrella, it is (or should be) the business requirement that drives the decision on what to buy.
While wearing my consultant hat, I need to have an understanding of a
products cost and benefit in order to address client needs.
Again, we eagerly await your analysis of MQ vs. Oracle AQ.
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| ucbus1 wrote: |
| I have been using the Websphere stack and now I am asked to take a look at Oracle stack. Though convinced Websphere stack would be apt, can not overthorow Oracle, especially with limited knowledge. I am sure some of the forum members would have migrated otherway round ( Oracle to Websphere) and thought could get valuable insight. Anyways |
It really depends in which world you are living and what you are trying to do with your MOM.
If you live exclusively within an Oracle world, AQ might be a better fit for YOU.
We live in a very mixed world and run the MQ/AQ gateway from Oracle. This gives us a road into the PL/SQL stack running off of Oracle AQ.
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| SAFraser |
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 742
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
|
Like fjb_saper, we use Oracle's AQ gateway to MQ for certain transactions.
I think you can't make a pros and cons without a description of the business requirement against which to judge each products' features.
In our case, there was a thought to eliminate the application that sat between MQ and Oracle, allowing Oracle to access MQ more directly. If I had a magic wand, I would make it go away. We only use it for a limited subset of transactions but it has added an extra technology to be supported, with no value added (that I can see). It is relatively stable, but lacks good error reporting when trouble occurs.
I have no experience with Oracle AQ in any other type of implementation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| George Carey |
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:36 pm Post subject: renewing the question |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 500
Location: DC
|
I will resubmit the original posters query for the same reasons.
I am dealing with an Oracle shop that has used MQ for half of its applications and Oracle AQ for the other half. The Oracle camp has won the application turf battle and wants the other half to use AQ and get off of MQ unless there are demonstrable reasons to keep MQ for the application.
The applications are all Java using Oracle app server and Oracle DB and using JMS so MQ API advantages have been some what neutralized.
Perhaps the issue could be worded as a salesman's challenge. Hey I have a customer that is an Oracle shop using Oracle AQ with JMS and Oracle comm components to do distributed application interfacing and want to know why it should look at MQ for any reason(s).
New apps will be written and current enhanced ... any reasons to use MQ instead of AQ for EAI, Monitoring or Administration reasons ?
I see a lot on howto integrate AQ and MQ but no direct vis a vis info.
rgrds
GTC
_________________
"Truth is ... grasping the virtually unconditioned",
Bernard F. Lonergan S.J.
(from book titled "Insight" subtitled "A Study of Human Understanding") |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
It can be very difficult for a software development team to produce "vis a vis" info while still maintaining the necessary legal hands-off to assert that you did not infringe on someone else's intellectual property.
Presumably there was a set of business justifications at the start of the projects that employed MQ as to why they were using MQ.
Presumably those justifications haven't changed.
Ask, also, the following questions: which messaging system has required more intervention into the application logic? which messaging system has required more intervention over the lifetime of the application? which messaging system has required more work and effort from system administration teams to install and more importantly to support and maintain? Which one has generated more internal troubletickets? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Mehrdad |
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Feb 2004
Posts: 219
Location: Europe
|
| The Account is likely (for sure?) to have assigned IBM hardware and software reps, technical staff, ..... fair bet they know the situation at hand there and would be willing tp offer their views on the subject. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| George Carey |
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 7:13 am Post subject: a tact |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 500
Location: DC
|
| Quote: |
| "... which messaging system has required more intervention into the application logic? which messaging system has required more intervention over the lifetime of the application? ..." |
I believe that is the proper tact ...I will put my thinking cap on for this approach. As a number of developers (the ones that lost the turf war!) have stated ... MQ just works.
They wanted to know how easy MQ was admined and monitored as well... unfortunately Oracle has integrated the app server administration functions to seemlessly administer AQ functions with its channels and queues, although channels are different animals for AQ. I have a disadvantage in not having a proper understanding what the can and can't dos of Oracle AQ are.
We are also using DataPowers for minor digital signature task maybe a tight tie in there could offer some leverage over AQ (e.g. MPGW and FSHs).
Also on Mehrdad's comment:
| Quote: |
| "The Account is likely (for sure?) to have assigned IBM hardware and software reps, technical staff, ..." |
Not really the case ... for various reasons ... not needing detail here. And most support know IBM product and not competitors to any extent (a normal situation for any vendor I would suppose).
_________________
"Truth is ... grasping the virtually unconditioned",
Bernard F. Lonergan S.J.
(from book titled "Insight" subtitled "A Study of Human Understanding") |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
