• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

MOM products vs JMS service given by Application Servers

 
Monmohan Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 82
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,
What are the pros/cons of using a MOM product like Sonic MQ/MQseries
vs
the JMS Servers provided inbuilt by the application servers like weblogic etc?
 
Kyle Brown
author
Ranch Hand
Posts: 3892
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
A commercial MOM product will allow you to connect to systems (mainframes, pervasive devices, etc.) that are not supported by the built-in JMS servers in the application servers. Those servers are exclusively Java to Java. For instance, MQ Series supports not only a Java interface, but a C/C++ interface, a COBOL interface, etc...

Also, commercial MOM products will often provide more features in terms of scalability and failover than a built-in server.

Kyle
 
Monmohan Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 82
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
If the communication is java to java then
Using MDB's etc should take care of scalability in terms of processing the messages , since the conatainer pools them.
Do the MOM products have lot of othe features which makes them worth the money?
 
Chris Mathews
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2712
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I think Kyle already answered your query with the second part of his post.

Originally posted by Kyle Brown:
Also, commercial MOM products will often provide more features in terms of scalability and failover than a built-in server.
 
Kyle Brown
author
Ranch Hand
Posts: 3892
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Monmohan Singh:
If the communication is java to java then
Using MDB's etc should take care of scalability in terms of processing the messages , since the conatainer pools them.
Do the MOM products have lot of othe features which makes them worth the money?


There's a lot more to scalability than being able to have multiple MDB's -- you need to make sure the underlying transport can effectively feed all of those MDB's and handle things correctly when a machine goes down.

For instance, with the built-in JMS servers in Weblogic and WebSphere if the machine that the queue is on goes down you are hosed, dead, kaput. A commercial MOM will allow you to recover from that. Also, a commercial MOM will allow you to scale up way beyond what a single machine hosting a queue can handle.

Kyle
 
Ade Barkah
Ranch Hand
Posts: 65
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Kyle Brown:
For instance, with the built-in JMS servers in Weblogic and WebSphere if the machine that the queue is on goes down you are hosed, dead, kaput. A commercial MOM will allow you to recover from that. Also, a commercial MOM will allow you to scale up way beyond what a single machine hosting a queue can handle.


That might be true with WebSphere, but with Weblogic one can define a cluster of physical queues to form a logical "distributed queue." If one machine goes down, work continues uninterrupted on the remaining machines. Furthermore, JMS load can be shared across the cluster, and if need be, pending messages can be migrated from one server to another server in the cluster. Frankly I'm surprised WebSphere does not have similar functionality.

-Ade Barkah
 
Kyle Brown
author
Ranch Hand
Posts: 3892
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Mea culpa -- my knowledge of Weblogic's queue clustering dates back to the 7.2 days, so I'm not surprised they've added that feature since then. At the time this was a big decision point for a project I consulted on to go with TIBCO instead of the built-in weblogic clustering.

Kyle
 
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!