SwiftMQ is a micro-kernel based JMS enterprise messaging platform. Major enhancements in version 4 include versioned protocol stacks, intra-VM JMS clients, new JMS application Container Swiftlet to run hot deployable JMS apps, JMS 1.1, high-speed XA on routing connections, and more.

Check out SwiftMQ 4.0.

Other links:
Release Notes
Performance Profile
JBoss IntraVM Integration
JOnAS IntraVM Integration
Pricing.

Downloaded, installed and up and running within 5 minutes, just over 20 times quicker than it took me to get IBM's JMS working with MQ Series but easily on a par with Progress’ Sonic MQ.

This is the sort of software J2EE architects and programmers should be concentrating on rather than trying to out do .NET. Didn’t you realise that .COM died in 2000, we’re now back in the real world with the real problems, we don’t need a pet store than can handle 350 simultaneous pet orders per second. Only rabbits could keep up with the orders!

This is where Java exceeds where Microsoft can't even begin to compete, connectivity, not just to other Java applications but to other real world systems, HP-UX, AIX, Solaris, Linux, AS/400, MQ-Series, Databases etc.

I haven’t had time to check out the full features of this version of SwiftMQ yet but I’ll post back here once I’ve given it a run through. It’s nice to get another 1.1 version so long after the spec too.

-John Davies-

www.C24.biz
Applied Solutions in Finance

> minutes, just over 20 times quicker than it took me to
> get IBM's JMS working with MQ Series

Well, I have to admit that it took me more than 5 minutes to download MQSeries, but setup with WebSphere was a breeze. When the time came to deploy the applications to the production environment I did appreciate the choice of MQSeries, since sys admins on iSeries and zOS claimes that configuring it on their platforms is a breeze as well. JMS on a proven messaging platform such as MQSeries is truly the best integration tool.

Websphere or MQSeries?

MQ v5.21 is a right pain!

There are 3 installations:
MQ obviously.
ma0c supportpac for PubSub support.
ma88 supportpac for the Java installation (which includes JMS)

The JMS Admin tools (tools?) are quite ugly. Cmd-line. You have to set the classpath manually before you can run the batch files which launch the Java green-screen tool. (would it have been so hard for ibm to write batch files that set up the classpath also???).
Then you usually hit the fact that JMS messaging is not automatically compatible with non JMS MQ clients... (you have to set some properties on the MQQueue object). There is no built-in JNDI......
As for mulit-language support, the ActiveX client is complete pants as well.

All in all, its a far-from pleasant experience.

I hear that 5.3 is better - but the installer crashes and I havent been able to install it (I think it is my machine).

However, as you say, it works and it is reliable and it can be found all over the place.

-Nick

SonicMQ is an equally easy install

What I see alot in the financial companies are positions for full time MQSeries administrators. Why? Because MQSeries is a bloated clunky beast. It looks like MQ5.2 has JMS strapped on the side as an afterthought. If you are looking for a JMS server, then buy one - dont buy a huge middleware platform with JMS support.

Anyhoo I've used SwiftMQ in the past and it has always been an excellent experience. Andreas is really on top of things...

Well, unlike other more resent additions to the MOM family MQSeries were there to define what MOM is. I guess JMS could be considered an afterthought since Java wasnt even born when MQSeries came along.

Hi!
WebSphere MQ (previously named MQSeries) has two interfaces to Java. One is through MQQueue and other classes, which isn't JMS and the other is pure JMS.
It seems that you have been using MQQueue.

Best regards,
   Kovi

> There are 3 installations:

Yeah, I agree that the installation isnt to convenient, but if it takes 2 hours to install a product that is going to run for years...? I have to say that administration is really smooth once its up and running...

> Then you usually hit the fact that JMS messaging is not
> automatically compatible with non JMS MQ clients...

Well, isnt this just a property of the fact that IBM couldnt really design their message format with JMS in mind, since JMS wasnt even thought of when MQSeries came along? Again unlike most of the competition in the JMS server market.

It's standards based. It's inexpensive. It's popular.

Congratulations! What else is there to say?

Peace,

Cameron Purdy
Tangosol, Inc.