Red Hat Spins Off JBoss 2.x As HornetQ 50
Several sources are reporting that Red Hat has spun off the 2.x release of the JBoss messaging protocol as HornetQ. The 1.x version of JBoss is still being supported in maintenance mode and will continue to be known by its original name. "HornetQ is an open source project to build a multi-protocol, embeddable, high performance, clustered, asynchronous messaging system. HornetQ is an example of Message Oriented Middleware. [...] HornetQ is designed with flexibility in mind: It's elegant POJO based design has minimal third party dependencies: Run HornetQ as a stand-alone messaging broker, run it in integrated in your favorite JEE application server, or run it embedded inside your own application. It's up to you."
Misleading (Score:3, Insightful)
What a badly written and misleading headline.
Re: (Score:1)
Yet another message passing system (Score:2)
Just what the world needed.
Is there something special about this that the 101 others around can't do or is it just a Me-Too product for Redhat?
Re:Yet another message passing system (Score:5, Informative)
Just what the world needed.
Is there something special about this that the 101 others around can't do or is it just a Me-Too product for Redhat?
JBoss MQ goes back to 2002 [sourceforge.net] and was renamed to JBoss Messaging and is now being renamed to HornetQ. Given that it's been around for so long, you should instead ask most of your 101 other ones why they are Me-Too products.
Re: (Score:2)
"Given that it's been around for so long"
Yeah, right. Go look up the 2 main ones used in the Fortune 100s - Websphere (formally) MQ Series and Tibco EMS and see how long they've been around.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, right. Go look up the 2 main ones used in the Fortune 100s - Websphere (formally) MQ Series and Tibco EMS and see how long they've been around.
I never claimed JBoss MQ has been around longest. Your initial statement was that there were 101 others and JBoss MQ is a Me-Too product for Redhat. Unless you can prove that there were 101 that came before JBoss MQ, your initial statement is bullshit.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I wouldn't call Knuth lazy even if the 4th volume of his Art of Computer Programming is a bit late. While you wait for it, the 3rd edition of Introduction to Algorithms [amazon.com] is available on Amazon. Please be patient!
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, those are also the reasons for all the new ones -- as asynchronous messaging becomes more important and more widely useful, event big, established customers for the big products in the field aren't happy with the existing options; after all, the AMQP protocol effort is essentially a collaboration of some of the biggest messaging users (particularly in the finan
Does this mean the end of QPID? (Score:1, Insightful)
Red Hat also makes an AMQP (Another Message Queue Protocol) broker called QPid. But it seems JBoss is much, much more successful. Does the explicit message focus in HornetQ mean that Red Hat will abandon AMQP? (Ok, it's "advanced message whatever")
Lets hope they fixed the major flows from 1.x (Score:4, Insightful)
In 1.x, a server would hang if a client died (OS Crash, Pull the plug). That is a cardinal sin in the world of MOM. The excuse for not fixing it in 1.x was that they were using some internal networking library. 2.x looks impressive indeed, but you know what my first will be. Pull the f'ing plug.
Re:Lets hope they fixed the major flows from 1.x (Score:4, Funny)
Heretic!
Transaction safety is an evil practice of proprietary systems from the 1970's. It's not something we should be concerned with in the Web 2.0/Open Source world.
POJO and message-oriented? (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow, what an incredible advancement over erlang and tuples.
Re: (Score:1)
Except people actually use Java /ducks
Re: (Score:2)
There's no reason why you couldn't mix and match. I guess the GP is suggesting that Erlang would be a better language for writing a messaging server - or perhaps he's alluding to an existing product.
For example, WebMethods is mostly a Java product, but its message server, sold as a reliable, high performance component, is written in C. (Note: I am not endorsing WebMethods).
So, it might well make sense to write a clustered messaging server in Erlang, accepting client connections from Java and other languages
Re:POJO and message-oriented? (Score:5, Informative)
And in case people wonder what POJO is (it seems to be tagged but not answered at the moment) they're Plain Old Java Objects (i.e. standard Java objects with no additional attributes or post-processing beyond what happens to any other class).
And why should we care? (Score:2, Offtopic)
Seriously. If all it is is a 'messaging protocol', why can't we just use UUCP or, say, something whose underlying compiler is stable? I've been having tremendous issues with having to install subtlely different JVM's for different applications because they cannot keep straight where the JVM's are installed, how to name them, or whether they are compatible with one different appliations. (Sun is no help with this, by the way: the 'write once, run everywhere' model for Java has been more of a 'write once, run
Re: (Score:2)
I've been having tremendous issues with having to install subtlely different JVM's for different applications because they cannot keep straight where the JVM's are installed
I don't think this has anything to do with the language or the compiler, but more to do with the relationship between the OS maker and Sun. Sun only recently opened up and allowed less restrictive re-distribution of the JVM, so you'll see open source versions of Java included with linux distributions these days. Before that happened it
Another name for bloatware (Score:1)
And yes, I know the Jboss have "lots of features". But nothing I cannot make by myself as needed and using a lot less memory.
Re: (Score:2)
Just another shinny new name for a bloated server... A Jboss server needs here one MINUTE to load. the Apache Tomcat server? Just 4 seconds
That's like comparing a Geo Metro to a Cadillac and complaining that the Cadillac is so damned heavy. Oh, shit. You've made me do a car analogy. I'm so very sorry. Rest assured, someone will come along and make it even worse - it's a weird compulsion people have here.
And yes, I know the Jboss have "lots of features". But nothing I cannot make by myself as needed and using a lot less memory.
Ahh, now I begin to see. Let me guess... you're in your early twenties, and figure that the only code that's worth shit is what you wrote yourself?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
There has tibia better explanation than that.
Re: (Score:2)
> A Jboss server needs here one MINUTE to load.
I think that many people feels that a Big and Expensive (even OSS bla bla) product should take for ever to load.
And most people didn't realize that all the apps they run just need a Web Container. Of course, there are exceptions, but apparently a lot of developers think that for whatever reason they need support for EJBs, JMS, JTA, Clustering, etc... for their JSP/JSF/Struts projects.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm confused. What does the JBoss application server have to do with this messaging middleware product? They are completely separate.
Why use a language-dependent MOM? (Score:1)
Clearing up a few inaccuracies (Score:1, Informative)
Hello all-
Just to correct a few misconceptions / errors here:
1) HornetQ is not a "messaging protocol" as the title states, it's a messaging system, a MoM (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message-oriented_middleware), other examples of MoMs are WebsphereMQ, Tibco EMS, ActiveMQ etc
2) HornetQ is a completely different project to JBoss Application Server - it shares zero code with JBoss AS. So any comments about JBoss Application Server start-up time are not relevant to HornetQ
3) HornetQ is a rebranding of the
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up. I has no mod points so can't do it myself.
- Jasen.
Clearing up a few inaccuracies (Score:5, Informative)
Just to correct a few misconceptions / errors here:
(I'm reposting as first time it seems to have lost my comment)
1) HornetQ is not a "messaging protocol" as the title states, it's a messaging system, a MoM (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message-oriented_middleware [wikipedia.org]), other examples of MoMs are WebsphereMQ, Tibco EMS, ActiveMQ etc
2) HornetQ is a completely different project to JBoss Application Server - it shares zero code with JBoss Application Server. So any comments about JBoss Application Server start-up time don't apply to HornetQ - HornetQ starts up very fast!
3) HornetQ is a rebranding of the JBoss Messaging 2.0 codebase by JBoss. The HornetQ codebase is almost completely different to JBoss Messaging 1.x and the old JBoss MQ codebase, so any comments about JBoss Messaging 1.x or JBoss MQ are not really relevant either, they're different systems.
All of the above are actually explained in the FAQ, but I thought I'd re-iterate them here.
Disclosure: I'm the project lead for HornetQ
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow!
Wh.... (Score:2)
I think I speak for a great segment of the Slashdot readership when I say:
WHAT THE FUCK DOES ANY OF THE ABOVE MEAN?!@
Thank you for your time.
So Jargon-filled, I can't understand what it is! (Score:1)