| Author |
Message
|
| ajomillar |
 Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 9:32 am Post subject: AMI - fallen out of favor? |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 22 Aug 2003
Posts: 121
Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
| For a small pub-sub project, my team will be using AMI. When downloading the ma0f support pack, I read the note that IBM does not recommend its use for current or future projects. Why has AMI fallen out of favor? It provides many features that simplifies writing publishers and subscribers. In addition, we need to use retained publications -- which JMS doesn't support. Using base MQ classes will require more coding. Any thoughts are appreciated... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| bower5932 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Aug 2001
Posts: 3023
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
|
| For several years at the Transaction and Messaging conference, IBM has been steering people away from using AMI. I remember one session where they asked for a show of hands of AMI users, and I don't think there were five hands raised. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2005 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
What I was told at the last T&M I attended, was that nobody other than IBM ever really implemented AMI - and nobody using MQ (other than the DB2 people!) every really USED AMI.
So why support it if it's not the industry standard it was supposed to be, and nobody is using it anyway...?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ajomillar |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 22 Aug 2003
Posts: 121
Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
| Then are the choices only JMS and base MQ Java? I like convenience that AMI provides. Plus, JMS doesn't support retained publications. Or is there a work around that doesn't involve too much coding? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bower5932 |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Aug 2001
Posts: 3023
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
|
| I've always been told that people could use JMS instead of the AMI but the discussion has never included anything about retained publications. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Retained publications are things you should think very very strongly about before deciding to use them. They are a relatively large overhead on the system, that should be avoided if possible - especially for a "small pub/sub project".
What requirement are you trying to fulfill by using retained publications?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ajomillar |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 22 Aug 2003
Posts: 121
Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
| A web application will display aggregates from a database. When the user logs on, they may have an identified (such as an office number) that allows them to see this information. On regular intervals, a publishing app will retrieve the aggregates from the database and publish to the MQ pub-sub broker using the office number in the topic. The subscribing app (web) will get the publications based on the topic. In this case, once the message is received by one user, I assume it will no longer be available. If there are several users attempting to access the same data, wouldn't it be first come, first serve? To put it another way, how can we have the message persist so it is available to several users via the web app. [Please excuse me if I'm not familiar with the JMS pub-sub capabilities. Any help is appreciated.] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I don't know that I would design a system this way, but I also don't know your requirements either.
But I wouldn't be concerned with the message being retained on the subscription queue. I would instead have the subscription process create a structure that represented each office number's aggregated data, and then have the web read from that structure, rather than from a message on a queue. In some ways, I'm not sure I'd even use pub/sub for this.
What language are you programming in?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bower5932 |
| Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Aug 2001
Posts: 3023
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
|
| AJM wrote: |
| In this case, once the message is received by one user, I assume it will no longer be available. If there are several users attempting to access the same data, wouldn't it be first come, first serve? |
If I understand what you are asking, a retained publication is retained for all new subscribers - not just for the first one to ask for it.
Without knowing more details, I'm inclined to agree with Jeff that this doesn't look like a pub/sub application. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
