| Author |
Message
|
| pratik_oze |
 Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:29 pm Post subject: Difference between WMQ, Active MQ and Sonic MQ |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 34
|
Hi,
Can anybody help me understand the differnece between WMQ, ActiveMq and Sonic MQ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 10:02 pm Post subject: Re: Difference between WMQ, Active MQ and Sonic MQ |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| pratik_oze wrote: |
Hi,
Can anybody help me understand the differnece between WMQ, ActiveMq and Sonic MQ? |
Different implementations of a messaging middleware from different vendors.
All should support the JMS interface.
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| pratik_oze |
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 34
|
Thanks for the reply.
but i would like to know the difference betweeen these there MQ based on their specifications or functionality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| pratik_oze wrote: |
| i would like to know the difference betweeen these there MQ based on their specifications or functionality. |
There is a wealth of information available on the respective web sites.
Conceptually each implements the JMS interface (which is a standard) and hence provide the same funtionality from the application viewpoint.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ashoon |
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:48 am Post subject: things to note |
|
|
Master
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 235
|
they're not interoperable i.e. SonicMQ can't talk to IBM MQ
IBM's MQ has more API's and supported platforms
IBM's MQ has been around over 10+ years with thousands of customers i.e. its proven technology and cheaper to maintain
_________________
IBM Certified - SOA Solution Designer & WebSphere Datapower SOA Appliances |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLRowe |
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 664
Location: South East London
|
I have used both sonic and websphere mq, so here's my list:
Sonic is written in java and is a JMS only provider, WMQ is written in native code and layers JMS on top of the WMQ messaging.
WMQ has a long list of supported platforms, including the obscure and esoteric. Sonic needs a java runtime to run on, but this basically includes any platform of any significance.
If you want to access messaging from non-java code, then basically you should go with WMQ, since it will have a binding/library for the languages/runtime on each platform, whereas sonic only supports java code.
You can certainly get the two interoperating with a simple bit of bridge code, as long as your WMQ messages are JMS. Message broker happily consumes/produces Sonic messages using the JMS nodes, however for XA you will need to use Websphere application server as message broker only supports XA for MQ and databases.
WMQ has been around for a long time, so supports a whole host of features that may or may not be relevant to you today: such as reference messages, encodings, multipart messages etc.
Since the JMS spec was devised later on than MQ and had the benefit of hindsight, and also had a need to find common ground amongst vendors then it is a lot 'simpler' in terms of features. For example, there are no COD/COA options in the base JMS spec, but of course your JMS provider may support a feature you need. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| pratik_oze |
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 34
|
Thanks a lot for the information on SonicMQ.
Can anybody give similar inputs for ActiveMQ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLRowe |
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 664
Location: South East London
|
ActiveMQ is open source under the apache license, whereas the other 2 products are closed. This means you are free to use it and change it, but you will have to pay a seperate service provider to provide you with support - thats if you want support of course.
It is similar to sonic in that it is purely java based, but has a lot of advanced (perhaps experimental features) such as pluggable persistence.
A lot of people in the 'open source' J2EE world seem to favour active MQ, and I have heard good things about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
