[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Pulp-list] Pulp's choice of middleware

The primary reason we selected QPID is that is the upstream for Red Hat's MRG (Messaging, Real-time and Grid) product. Although, MRG is tuned for performance running on RHEL, I don't know of any specific performance advantages of QPID over RabbitMQ or ActiveMQ. By selecting QPID, pulp can be deployed using either QPID or MRG. That said, your request to make it pluggable in Pulp (Gofer really) or to support other middleware is reasonable. However, unlike the Java, not all the python (MOM) client libs conform to an API standard such as JMS (Except ActiveMQ - pyactivemq, I think.). So, making it pluggable would probably require a significant effort.

I believe there is compatibility between QPID 0.6+ and RabbitMQ (via AMQP) so they /may/ be interchangeable but we haven't tested it.

Hope this helps.

On 12/07/2011 11:54 AM, Mohit Chawla wrote:
Hi, just trying to get some perspective on the choice of middleware
that pulp supports. AFAIK, a lot of folks have familiarity with
rabbitmq or activemq. Are there any technical advantages for using
Qpid ? Would it be better to make pulp pluggable, so that it is up to
the end user to decide his choice of middleware using a specific
protocol ?

Pulp-list mailing list
Pulp-list redhat com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]