| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Would MB be made redundant by ESB (the product) ? |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| jbanoop |
 Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 6:05 pm Post subject: Would MB be made redundant by ESB (the product) ? |
 |
|
Chevalier
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 401
Location: SC
|
Hi All,
I recently made my way into MQ and WBIMB from java/J2EE (on which I started off with).
Now that I have made the transition and have ben working on MB for some time, with all the talk and hype about the WESB from IBM, I was wondering what the future holds for message boker.
The MB's position as a preferred integration tool, is it going to be affected (in the near future) or would the ESB and the Message broker be serving two different requirements (as I could understand from the little IBM doc I read up on).
How long do you think till the ESB solution matures into a threat (if any) to MB and other integration products ?
I was pondering over these (mostly from reading the dfferent threads on the BB) and was wondering if I could get some views from the real experts themselves  .
And yes,.. am a relative newbie at MQ and MB and a long way to go ..
Regards,
Anoop |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| gorilla |
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 16
|
Perhaps this could be moved to the thread "Discussion of WebSphere Enterprise Service Bus"?
I don't know if I want to claim to be a "real expert" in this company, but I've used WMB and played with WESB, so here's my $0.02 for what it's worth:
Eventually (one or two product generations) there probably won't be any interesting functional differences between the two except for the extra protocols and the legacy support in WMB.
This won't kill WMB for a long time though:
* WMB is immortal as a product anyway because there are so many of them out there
* WMB will probably always be a lot faster (faster response time, more throughput on the same hardware). I'm already looking at situations where we may need separate infrastructure layers for "fast and lightweight" and "slower / more function", and I expect to see a lot more of this as real SOA's get built
* The speed difference isn't Java/EJB vs C/MQ - the product's architectures are different, and (to my eye at least) this means thre performance profiles will be very different.
A thought to put the performance thing in perspective:
Imagine you built the coders version of a SOA, and "Web Service enable" *everything* - how many Web Service calls per second will you generate for a decent sized system? Whatever number you come up with, I'd expect it to be far beyond the capabilities of any normal "EAI infrasatructure" design and/or technology. I think we're going to be messing around with the "performance vs function" tradeoff in the infrastructure for a long time yet.
Changes in technologies and price-points will make these conclusions less accurate in time of course, but not for at least 2 or 3 years IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLRowe |
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 664
Location: South East London
|
I would say that the ESB will be faster, because:
* Java code is just as fast as C++, and has superior memory management. With a 64 bit OS you can have a massive heap
* Java is faster than ESQL, they are both tokenised (i.e. not compiled to a binary), but JVM's are so highly optimised and they are still finding new optimisations as time goes on - there should be a 10% boost in Java 6 over 5 because of new techniques such as escape analysis.
* The messaging engine persists to a database, a database's raison d'etre (  ) is persisting data as efficiently and quickly as possible. That's why JMS message selectors in MQ plough through the whole queue and hopefully WAS 6 messaging holds this in an index in the database.
There is a lot of stuff you can only do in WMB, and a lot of people have skills in using the product. But maintaining 2 product sets that have a great deal of overlap is not in the interests of any business, how quickly the needed functionality comes to the ESB, and how quickly people and projects move over is only something that time will tell.
Last edited by JLRowe on Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| JLRowe wrote: |
| * Java code is just as fast as C++, and has superior memory management. With a 64 bit OS you can have a massive heap |
And yet, nobody is writing OSes in Java.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| markt |
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 508
|
>> A database's reson d'etre is persisting data as efficiently and quickly as possible
I have to disagree with that. A database is there to provide efficient searches of large amounts of data. The performance of updates are lower priority.
The patterns of update in messaging - almost entirely writes, not reads - and the searching - typically retrieving at the top of a queue - are very different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
And please do spell check
It is
from French.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gorilla |
| Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 16
|
The speed thing isn't Java vs C, and to the extent that it's Java related, it's EJB (with its annoying CORBA overhead) vs Java anyway. There are also significant differences in the product architecture - it's not just a question of the server platform.
WESB will certainly become faster in time, and I'm certainly not claiming that it will never catch up to or surpass WMB, but for the moment (current release at least, and probably, but not necessarily, the first two releases) performence/efficiency is one of the interesting differences. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
