[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       activemq-users
Subject:    Re: ActiveMQ vs Apache artemis
From:       Bennet Schulz <mail () bennet-schulz ! de>
Date:       2017-09-21 15:41:18
Message-ID: 3823CCC8-26D4-464B-BBC1-1C02B1AB6C23 () bennet-schulz ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

don't believe everything someone writes on his blog especially not if it's an IBM employee who writes his product would be the best ;-)

> Am 21.09.2017 um 16:37 schrieb Justin Bertram <jbertram@redhat.com>:
> 
> If you're starting from scratch then I would recommend ActiveMQ Artemis.
> Artemis' feature set is on par with the ActiveMQ 5.x code-base and
> performance is better.
> 
> FWIW, I personally think the article you referenced is almost entirely FUD
> [1].
> 
> 
> Justin
> 
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt
> 
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 9:06 AM, dayakarr <dayakarr@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We have requirement of queuing mechanism and therefore planning to make
>> use
>> of Apache ActiveMQ. While researching on Apache ActiveMQ we observed the
>> subproject namely Apache artemis.
>> 
>> We have also noticed the below mentioned links with regards to Apache
>> future
>> direction is towards Apache Artemis.
>> https://advantage.ibm.com/2016/11/17/what-is-the-future-
>> of-apache-activemq/
>> 
>> Can you please guide us on which queuing mechanism to use "Apache ActiveMQ"
>> or Apache Artemis?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dayakar
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Sent from: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-User-
>> f2341805.html
>> 

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]