You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@servicemix.apache.org by Gert Vanthienen <ge...@gmail.com> on 2009/07/02 22:10:17 UTC
Re: JBI JMS component and LW JMS component
L.S.,
You're right, the lightweight components have been deprecated in favor
of the full JBI-compliant components. The servicemix-lwcontainer
component is no longer supported in ServiceMix 4 and any new
development is going into the servicemix-jms component, so I would
definitely recommend you to start using that one. A few versions ago,
this component got a new set of consumer/provider endpoints (cfr.
http://servicemix.apache.org/servicemix-jms-new-endpoints.html). A bit
more work has been done for the latest release to even better support
the different kinds of MEPs, transactional behavior and integration
with SMX4/OSGi (cfr.
http://servicemix.apache.org/servicemix-jms-200901.html)
Regards,
Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
2009/6/30 ffrenchm <ff...@gmail.com>:
>
> After some research I discovered that LW components are deprecated. Anyway I
> try to check the differences between JBI JMS BC and LW JMS BC and I've the
> impression there are greats improvements in the JBI JMS BC considering the
> JMS exchange <-> JMS flow implementations. I would like to know if there is
> some release note which summarize these kind of changes ...
>
> Thanks
>
>
> ffrenchm wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I discovered that there is two JMS BC (JBI and LW) and I'm not sure to
>> understand the reasons of these two differents implementations from a JMS
>> / JBI exchange point of view. Are these two implementations achieving the
>> same goals ? Could you explain me the reasons of LW components ? Is that
>> just a question of configuration and deployment ? Are the JBI components
>> not enough ?
>>
>> Thanks for all.
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/JBI-JMS-component-and-LW-JMS-component-tp24269118p24273123.html
> Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: JBI JMS component and LW JMS component
Posted by ffrenchm <ff...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
thanks for your answers... I've another questions about the jms provider
endpoint : does it manage transaction ? As far as I read the source code
I've the impression there is no transaction managed by this endpoint... Am I
false ?
Thanks for all
Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
> L.S.,
>
> You're right, the lightweight components have been deprecated in favor
> of the full JBI-compliant components. The servicemix-lwcontainer
> component is no longer supported in ServiceMix 4 and any new
> development is going into the servicemix-jms component, so I would
> definitely recommend you to start using that one. A few versions ago,
> this component got a new set of consumer/provider endpoints (cfr.
> http://servicemix.apache.org/servicemix-jms-new-endpoints.html). A bit
> more work has been done for the latest release to even better support
> the different kinds of MEPs, transactional behavior and integration
> with SMX4/OSGi (cfr.
> http://servicemix.apache.org/servicemix-jms-200901.html)
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> 2009/6/30 ffrenchm <ff...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> After some research I discovered that LW components are deprecated.
>> Anyway I
>> try to check the differences between JBI JMS BC and LW JMS BC and I've
>> the
>> impression there are greats improvements in the JBI JMS BC considering
>> the
>> JMS exchange <-> JMS flow implementations. I would like to know if there
>> is
>> some release note which summarize these kind of changes ...
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> ffrenchm wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I discovered that there is two JMS BC (JBI and LW) and I'm not sure to
>>> understand the reasons of these two differents implementations from a
>>> JMS
>>> / JBI exchange point of view. Are these two implementations achieving
>>> the
>>> same goals ? Could you explain me the reasons of LW components ? Is that
>>> just a question of configuration and deployment ? Are the JBI components
>>> not enough ?
>>>
>>> Thanks for all.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/JBI-JMS-component-and-LW-JMS-component-tp24269118p24273123.html
>> Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
> -----
> ---
> Gert Vanthienen
> http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/JBI-JMS-component-and-LW-JMS-component-tp24269118p24323848.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: JBI JMS component and LW JMS component
Posted by ffrenchm <ff...@gmail.com>.
Another question :) For the jms basic consumer endpoint and the jms soap
consumer you define a parameter to set the transaction type. In the case I
want XA transaction with this kind of endpoint what will be the resource
adapter used by this endpoint ?
Thanks
Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
> L.S.,
>
> You're right, the lightweight components have been deprecated in favor
> of the full JBI-compliant components. The servicemix-lwcontainer
> component is no longer supported in ServiceMix 4 and any new
> development is going into the servicemix-jms component, so I would
> definitely recommend you to start using that one. A few versions ago,
> this component got a new set of consumer/provider endpoints (cfr.
> http://servicemix.apache.org/servicemix-jms-new-endpoints.html). A bit
> more work has been done for the latest release to even better support
> the different kinds of MEPs, transactional behavior and integration
> with SMX4/OSGi (cfr.
> http://servicemix.apache.org/servicemix-jms-200901.html)
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> 2009/6/30 ffrenchm <ff...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> After some research I discovered that LW components are deprecated.
>> Anyway I
>> try to check the differences between JBI JMS BC and LW JMS BC and I've
>> the
>> impression there are greats improvements in the JBI JMS BC considering
>> the
>> JMS exchange <-> JMS flow implementations. I would like to know if there
>> is
>> some release note which summarize these kind of changes ...
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> ffrenchm wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I discovered that there is two JMS BC (JBI and LW) and I'm not sure to
>>> understand the reasons of these two differents implementations from a
>>> JMS
>>> / JBI exchange point of view. Are these two implementations achieving
>>> the
>>> same goals ? Could you explain me the reasons of LW components ? Is that
>>> just a question of configuration and deployment ? Are the JBI components
>>> not enough ?
>>>
>>> Thanks for all.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/JBI-JMS-component-and-LW-JMS-component-tp24269118p24273123.html
>> Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
> -----
> ---
> Gert Vanthienen
> http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/JBI-JMS-component-and-LW-JMS-component-tp24269118p24324434.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.