Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I have few questions regarding HornetQ:
What are differences between HornetQ core API and the JMS API ?
is there any advantage or disadvantage on using one of these ?
Is it true to say if I use the core API and then I decide to
change my Messaging Bus (let’s say to ActiveMQ) then I have to
change all my codes ?
HornetQ Core API is a proprietary API from HornetQ, while the JMS API is a standard API defined by the Java Community Process.
There are a few features that are not supported on JMS API, that are available through core-api:
It’s not possible to have multiple consumers on a single topic subscription (say if you wanted to have multiple consumers to scale it better)
It’s more generic on how you create the subscription. You just create a queue within an address. Very simple.
We have a nice API for asynchronous confirmations. No need to block ever if you use this feature.
The advantage on the JMS is portability. Your code stays the same if you decide to move between providers.
The disadvantage on JMS is that it lacks some features and it’s a bit verbose, what’s under works on JMS 2 JSR right now.
If you encapsulate your Messaging access you can minimize that a lot though where you could just replace a single class on your system using standard OO techniques.