Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Message Queuing System
psicode writes "John Davies has announced AMQ, an effort at JPMorgan Chase & Co. to create an open-source message queuing system that can compete with proprietary message systems like IBM MQSeries and Tibco/RV. The announcement was made at the
annual conference Web
Services on Wall Street during Davies' presentation on February 1. eWeek has an article today with more details and some funny statements about Red Hat, SuSE and Sun possibly integrating AMQ into their "kernel". If JPMorgan Chase & Co. follows through with their announcement and they come up with a suitable open-source license, AMQ could become the Apache of messaging systems."
Perhaps it's worth mentioning since they are integrating an app into the kernel. At least that's what it sounds like. Well if you wonder why kernels seem to get more and more bloated...
"they come up with a suitable open-source license, AMQ could become the Apache of messaging systems."
If they want to be the Apache, then they'll have to use the Apache license too. Effects have causes.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
As a voting libertarian, I whole-heartedly encourage companies to actively develop whatever technical solution that best fits their needs. This is one example of how open source software really fits in with the libertarian world view. It's not the "free software versus only commercial software," but a mix and match that lets both coexist. If someone wants to develop their own software, then let them and don't even begrudge them the right to give it away.
This is what really pisses me off about the copyright expansionists. They don't want people to be able to easily develop software for free. Copyright expansionism, as pushed by groups like the "Progress and Freedom Foundation" is not about freedom, it's about protecting business against hobbyists and other "asymmetric competition." I bet it makes such groups' heads spin to think that one of the biggest corporations on Wall Street is now about to dive head first into open source development and that the result of this development could send shockwaves through a segment of the commercial software industry.
The freedom to write open source software is the same freedom to write closed source software. If you erode the foundation for the former, then you have no right to demand respect for the latter. That is why when the big copyright cartels lobby Congress, I see nothing wrong in doing things like buying academic licenses for software and taking them out into the real world. The copyright holder makes no profit on the academic license, only the seller does.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
an open-source message queuing system that can compete with proprietary message systems like IBM MQSeries
Somewhere in IBM's headquarters there is a camel. A straw has just been placed on its back.
Direct away from face when opening.
I have noticed the phenomenon you mention, though I would hardly call it "anyone." I suppose I could have elaborated on the details of how a system-based message queuing system is designed to be a lossless, connectionless method for intrasystem messaging, much like a small town post office, where one piece of software delivers a message, often packaged as XML or CSV, and marks it for entry into a particular queue or stack. When other pieces of software are subscribed to the queue in question, they pick up the messages that get registered there. The messages are either destroyed on pick up or stay in the queue, depending on what type the queue is. But all this is just a surface look at how MQs are used and how they work. A layman's introduction, it might be said. It also doesn't cover the fact that they can be used as the back-end for IM systems, if you write the appropriate client software. I was thinking that this person might like to have their choice of in-depth articles to read that would educate them far more than I was willing to in the short time alloted to me for reading Slashdot each day.
But thanks for your concern. I'm done trolling for now, how about you?
The Spoon
Updated 6/28/2011
Some years ago a company I worked for was quoted one hundred thousand dollars as the cost to license IBM MQ Series messaging. There could be some serious savings in using an OSS product like this.
By the technical ignorance of some of the posters here... Before you post, please make sure you have at least an inkling about what you're talking about! A Message-Oriented Middleware system has absolutely nothing to do with IM, or Web Services (except in a very indirect way), or even REST systems. /. seems to be in dire need of real geeks, it seems...
How is this different from e-mail? It sounds the just like e-mail that happens to be carrying messages that are intended to be parsed by applications, rather than humans. What's the magic? Is this just a more secure, reliable mail system?
<sarcasm>Really hard to do, if it is meant in the MQSeries way.</sarcasm> If MQSeries can't deliver a message, it puts it on a dead.letters.queue. I am not impressed.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
>This is what really pisses me off about the copyright expansionists.
I really appreciate source code licenses that actually let you use the source code permanently such as BSD.
Copyright expansionist vehicles, such as GPL, end up costing too much in the long run.
Did you read the article? The whole point of this project, is they need something that can support more than just Java! As much as the people on the TSS.com like to feel, Java is not always the best solution and sometimes you do need to write some high perf. sensitive code in unmanaged code like C/C++. You can't do that with a JMS based solution, at least not easily.
From what I've seen of MQ et al, they don't seem to offer that much on top of standard TCP/IP, but it eventually gets to be a pain in the ass to reimplement that sort of thing in every position. Especially when you factor debugging and stuff in.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Surprise, surprise, this sounds just like SMTP.
Ever had a situation where an SMTP server screws up the mail queue and deletes all the messages? Or the server goes down at the wrong moment and as a result all messages are delivered twice? Or a message gets stuck in a loop and gets sent over and over again, thousands of times until it fills the spool?
If that message happens to trigger a large financial transaction, that would be a bad thing.
What is a message queue, why should I care, what does this have to do with anything, what are they talking about? In short: what kinds of messages are we talking about, what are sending them to what, and why do we need to queue them?
"A message queue is a queue onto which messages can be placed."
thanks a fucking lot google
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
GPL = something for something.
Changa hates change.
Keep in mind that Wall Street was probably *the* major engine driving Web applications into the mainstream in the 1990s. One reason Wall Street went crazy touting the Web as an unlimited business panacea was that it was actually like that for its own industry. By the time they promoted it in 1995, Wall Street shops had been churning out httpd patches, CGI apps, Perl revisions and code, DB connection software and techniques, TCL patterns, and all kinds of R&D that underpinned much of the development momentum. Message Queueing has a similar arc, because Wall Street both inhabits the bloodiest edge on which they can survive, and has the least tolerance for failure. The flakiness of network messaging is the root of some of the worst inhibition on network growth among users and deployers - Wall Street has been there, and has answers. Let's use them.
--
make install -not war
I've found the general CORBA framework to be pretty simple, and even taught it in a C++ intro class. There's a lot of details, but that's true of any well-thought-out system. Often times complaints of "complexity" are actually complaints about something being well thought out. Attempts to "simplify" just bring about evil things like SOAP, which, despite it's acronym is not simple, has nothing to do with objects, and isn't even a specced out protocol. "access" is the only part of its name that isn't a complete fabrication.
Engineering and the Ultimate
It's not that this can't be done over SMTP, but that SMTP isn't practical for it - you'd need lots of extra data in the headers, and applications supporting it.
Sure, you can write the support for all of it on top of SMTP, or FTP or SCP or HTTP or any protocol you can think of that can move data from one point to another, but the whole point of message queueing applications is that the heavy lifting has been done for you.
If you don't care about the transactions, or it doesn't matter if your messages can be delivered twice by mistake, or any of the other features of a proper message queuing system, then sure, go ahead and use a mail server - a previous place I worked we used Qmail with good results. It's a trade off, but the difference is huge.
What JP Morgan and other Wall Street firms use message queuing software for is trading in the financial markets. So if the software bugs out, they stand to lose millions of dollars per minute or more depending on the size of the trades they are executing. So I see this story as a positive for open source software because if Wall Street people think they can get a usable mission critical piece of software out of the open source community then no other potential target for OSS is invulnerable.
"Lack of technical competence coupled with the arrogance of power, as usual, leads to no good end."
There is no guarantee that the receiver will ever pick up the message from the queue. Just like SMTP, I can send you a message, but there is no guarantee that you will ever look at your mailspool/inbox/pop server/imap server. My point is that it is no better than SMTP.
-molo
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
Everyone's asking "Why?" and debating the technical bits. I'll tell you why. So they can get a deep discount on MQSeries from IBM.
I bet it'll take at least 5 years before this new thing makes any inroads in financial customers, but this must be really scary for IBM's MQSeries folks.
Things like MQ Series are bread-and-butter of many sales reps as there's no serious competition to their solution - I haven't talked to many banks, but those to which I did all use MQSeries.
OSS is moving from the edge to the data center, it's already half-way there. Five more years and banks will be able to get 80% of their apps under GPL license.