james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Brewin" <sbre...@synsys.com>
Subject RE: New Mailet API - Was Re: what competition is doing
Date Tue, 03 May 2005 21:02:59 GMT
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Serge Knystautas wrote:

> > I'm pretty excited about ActiveMQ (http://activemq.codehaus.org/)
> > which we could bundle, and then provide any JMS integration.
> We can look, but I'm concerned about performance.

JMS is a specification, not a product. It covers several common types of
inter-application messaging with APIs for each. Which type of messaging we
use we decide, which implementation is pluggable. At its most basic, within
a single VM an in-memory implementation would add no overhead, a JMS adapter
around our existing persistence queueing mechanisms would add no additional
overhead, a distributed implementation would add some overhead in return for
its benefits.

Using the JMS API enables a deployer to select the trade-offs appropiate to
their deployment and plug-in the JMS implementation prevalent in their

I don't see any downsides with going the JMS route beyond a little rework.

-- Steve

To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message