Discussions

News: SonicMQ 4.0 Passes J2EE 1.3 Compatibility Tests

  1. Sonic Software's SonicMQ 4.0 message-oriented middleware has passed the Compatibility Test Suite for J2EE version 1.3. For a JMS server vendor to pass the J2EE CTS, it needs to be bundled with the J2EE reference implementation. Sonic is the first JMS vendor to pass the 1.3 CTS.

    Check out http://www.sonicsoftware.com/

    Press Release
    ---------------------
    BEDFORD, Mass. & SANTA CLARA, Calif. - January 22, 2002 - Sonic Software's SonicMQ 4.0 is the first message-oriented middleware product to pass the Compatibility Test Suite for Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition (J2EE) version 1.3 as integrated with Sun Microsystems' (NASDAQ: SUNW) Reference Implementation. Based on the Java Message Service (JMS) API, SonicMQ provides global organizations with highly scalable, standards-based Internet middleware for the secure delivery of business critical data across the extended enterprise. Sun's J2EE Compatibility Test Suite is the industry's only comprehensive test suite for assessing compatibility with the J2EE specifications, ensuring seamless interoperability of best-of-breed components that improve the quality and ROI of enterprise application development.

    "Sonic Software is the messaging provider of choice for today's distributed application and Web services deployments," said Greg O'Connor, president of Sonic Software. "SonicMQ enables organizations to quickly adapt to ever-changing business requirements and stay one step ahead of their competitors, while being fully standards compliant. And Sonic is committed to driving advancements in Web services and J2EE Connector Architecture support."

    "SonicMQ is at the forefront of an industry effort to simplify business integration and Web services in a standard way, as part of a J2EE 1.3 compatible configuration. Developers and enterprises are choosing Java technology for business integration with confidence," said Ralph Galantine, product marketing line manager, J2EE, Sun Microsystems. "By making it possible to share information between applications anytime, anywhere and on any platform or environment, SonicMQ's industrial-strength messaging platform and Java technology enables enterprise architects and business managers to succeed in intensely competitive markets."

    Incorporating Sonic Software's patent-pending Dynamic Routing Architecture™ (DRA), SonicMQ ensures guaranteed message delivery with unparalleled performance and scalability. SonicMQ seamlessly integrates with industry-leading J2EE technology-based application servers including BEA WebLogic Server, IBM WebSphere, Borland AppServer, HP Bluestone Total-e-Server and IONA's Orbix E2A Application Server Platform.

    Sonic Software's recently announced SonicXQ™ provides an intelligent XML-based backbone for integrating diverse applications and technologies across the extended enterprise. More open and flexible than traditional integration solutions, SonicXQ offers any-to-any connectivity through a distributed service-oriented architecture. SonicXQ delivers a comprehensive set of components and services for reliably connecting applications within and beyond the enterprise.

    About Sonic Software Corporation
    Sonic Software enables reliable interoperability of software applications within and across enterprises based on Web services and Internet messaging standards. Sonic products provide advanced security capabilities, unmatched performance and scalability, and guaranteed delivery of mission-critical information.



  2. What does this mean first JMS vendor to pass 1.3 test? WebSphere 5.0 Tech for developers has a built in JMS engine as well as an MQSeries implementation and it passed the test? I don't understand the marketting behind this.

    First only JMS vendor?

    I have seen lately a couple other vendors passing the 1.3 test on this site, but the sun site does not list them?

  3. Roland: "First only JMS vendor?"

    Yes, the first JMS-only product. AFAIK Sonic is part of Progress. They used to have a pretty well-integrated Java development tool and app server, but I think it's all been renamed (maybe "Provision" now?). They have an RDBMS that was fairly popular for many years in low- to mid-range applications. Regarding their SonicMQ product, they may lose a lot of potential accounts to IBM MQS but from what I've heard that isn't because of either price or performance.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
  4. Thanks,

    I think MQSeries is the best product out there for messaging.

    I saw the JMS benchmark and Sonic used the client API instead of the binding API. The Client API uses sockets to a server listener, however a fair comparison would be the bindings which how most poeple use it. If they comapred JMS based on bindings, I don't think they would get the same results. Furthermore, JMS aside, MQSeries is probably much faster than Sonic.

  5. >> I think MQSeries is the best product out there for messaging

    You need to be specific about what kind of messaging. MQSeries does have a strong track record in queue-based messaging. Topic-based messaging is nowhere near as mature. Even with IBM's tech support, we had numerous problems setting up MQSeriesJMS for pub-sub tests. In the end, MQJMS scored very poorly in the pub-sub benchmark.


    >> Furthermore, JMS aside, MQSeries is probably much faster
    >> than Sonic.

    Do you think that JMS is not important?

    Also, some benchmarking tests that we carried out definitely showed native MQSeries performance to be lagging behind most of the JMS vendors (Sonic, Spirit, etc) for even queue based messaging (accross a range of message sizes).

    I dont think that anyone chooses MQ for performance (or ease of installation!!!) - its more to do with its maturity and reputation for reliability. When messages represent multi-million dollar transactions, no-one cares too much about performance...


    On another score...
    You seem to know a fair bit about IBM products (you plug/defend them, at least ;-). Can you tell me what the difference is between WebsphereJMS and MQSeriesJMS - cutting through the marketing bollocks? Have you spend much time yet looking at the Websphere 5?

    Cheers.

  6. I can't say toomuch about other messaging products, but I would agree p2p messaging in MQ is more mature.

    WebSphere 4 treats JMS vendors external, so MQSeries JMS (now WebSphere MQ) plugs right in as the default. JNDI bindings are external although, with WebSphere MQ you can register within the same JNDI and have the external name point to the internal one.

    WebSphere 5 Tech. for developers comes with a built in JMS server as an alternative to MQSeries. For self contained messaging applications within the app server, you no longer need to purchase MQSeries. WebSphere's internal JMS engine is a lighter weight WebSphereMQ. Although, there is still great integration with MQSeries.

    Many IBM customers also love MQ for add-on products like MQSeries Workflow and Integrator, as most importantly, great Mainframe integration and connectivity. MQSeries runs very fast on the Mainframe and has great integration with CICS applications.


    (View is my own and not necessarily IBM's)


  7. Ahh, you work for IBM?

  8. Yes I do, Software Services.

  9. I see. That now fits into place.

    I havent seen too many people evangelising IBM products (other than IBM employees of course) - I thought that perhaps you were an exception...