4 ms·

> It's not correctly configured out of the box. You mean there's a correct configuration? Also, Tomcat, Jetty, PostgreSQL, and Ngnix don't "install correctly"

by ibejoeb 15y ago

> It's not correctly configured out of the box. You mean there's a correct configuration? Also, Tomcat, Jetty, PostgreSQL, and Ngnix don't "install correctly" out of the box as described here. Tomcat clusters set themselves up? Postgres? Hell, I think default shared buffers allocation is 32 MB... > Anything that streams bytes I'm not sure what the author is trying to do. Doesn't sound like queuing to me... The documentation is terrible, so I'll give that up. It is unfortunate that there is so much experimentation involved in setting it up. ActiveMQ is immensely versatile and configurable, and it's sort of necessarily complex to get it perfect for your task. It's not a turn-key software; it's a systems architecture component.

ja27 15y ago
Well, if every piece of enterprise software worked right out of the box, consultants would be out of business. I have to admit that I'm not a big user of ActiveMQ, but I've used a closed-source equivalent from a slightly bigger vendor (IBM) for many years. It also is not configured correctly out of the box for most enterprises. When new features or platforms come out they are often buggy. The documentation though is usually decent until you really want to dig into the internals and understand it.
- cmkrnl 15y ago
  Ah, dear old WebSphere MQ. Generally awful, bad high-availability story unless you invest in heavy-handed clustering at the OS level. Great for enterprise integration if there's a mainframe around, I suppose. Documentation: quantity over quality. They do have a lot of documentation to show for the cost of the product. Written in C++, so more memory-efficient than messaging middleware written in Java. Excuse my ranting -- I'm a middleware system administrator and WMQ is the necessary evil at my workplace.
cmkrnl 15y ago
Yes, streaming doesn't sound like queueing, but both JMS (and many vendors implement JMS) and AMQP support some form of streaming. Of course, in combination with high availability, YMMV.
brown9-2 15y ago
The part about Tomcat certainly isn't true, unless the author is using a different distribution than what you get from the project's website. The Tomcat startup scripts do not set any heap size paramters; until recently the default Sun JVM behavior was to set a max heap size of only 64MB. This logic changed a few versions ago to use a fractional amount of the total memory size on the machine, but for dedicated hosts this is still rarely the setup you want. Perhaps the author is using a packaged version of Tomcat from his OS distributor.
- ibejoeb 15y ago
  Yeah, I don't know what else it could be. It's up to the distribution maintainers then. It's a straw man. ActiveMQ does just fine. I have a very high volume implementation that I haven't touched in almost 2 years. That it's not production ready is pretty big claim. I don't want my clients reading this and getting all jittery on me.
Uchikoma 15y ago
Our Tomcats definetly didn't check for file handles, or run out of the box. The same goes for our NGINX. Can't talk about PostgreSQL, but MySQL certainly isn't delivered in a high volume configuration either.

by ibejoeb 15y ago

ja27 15y ago

Well, if every piece of enterprise software worked right out of the box, consultants would be out of business. I have to admit that I'm not a big user of ActiveMQ, but I've used a closed-source equivalent from a slightly bigger vendor (IBM) for many years. It also is not configured correctly out of the box for most enterprises. When new features or platforms come out they are often buggy. The documentation though is usually decent until you really want to dig into the internals and understand it.

cmkrnl 15y ago
Ah, dear old WebSphere MQ. Generally awful, bad high-availability story unless you invest in heavy-handed clustering at the OS level. Great for enterprise integration if there's a mainframe around, I suppose. Documentation: quantity over quality. They do have a lot of documentation to show for the cost of the product. Written in C++, so more memory-efficient than messaging middleware written in Java. Excuse my ranting -- I'm a middleware system administrator and WMQ is the necessary evil at my workplace.

cmkrnl 15y ago

Yes, streaming doesn't sound like queueing, but both JMS (and many vendors implement JMS) and AMQP support some form of streaming. Of course, in combination with high availability, YMMV.

brown9-2 15y ago

The part about Tomcat certainly isn't true, unless the author is using a different distribution than what you get from the project's website. The Tomcat startup scripts do not set any heap size paramters; until recently the default Sun JVM behavior was to set a max heap size of only 64MB. This logic changed a few versions ago to use a fractional amount of the total memory size on the machine, but for dedicated hosts this is still rarely the setup you want. Perhaps the author is using a packaged version of Tomcat from his OS distributor.

ibejoeb 15y ago
Yeah, I don't know what else it could be. It's up to the distribution maintainers then. It's a straw man. ActiveMQ does just fine. I have a very high volume implementation that I haven't touched in almost 2 years. That it's not production ready is pretty big claim. I don't want my clients reading this and getting all jittery on me.

Uchikoma 15y ago

Our Tomcats definetly didn't check for file handles, or run out of the box. The same goes for our NGINX. Can't talk about PostgreSQL, but MySQL certainly isn't delivered in a high volume configuration either.