JMS和CORBA之间的区别? [英] Differences between JMS and CORBA?

问题描述

我刚刚阅读了有关CORBA和JMS的信息，它们似乎都用于实现 经纪人体系结构/模式 .

I have just read about CORBA and JMS, they both seem to be used to implement Broker Architecture/Pattern.

关于它们，我有几个问题

I have few questions regarding them

1.它们之间的区别对我来说还是不清楚的，有人请解释一下吗?

1.The differences between them are still not clear to me, anybody please explain ?

2.CORBA是否用于当今的IT解决方案?还是失去魅力了?

2.Is CORBA is used in today's IT Solutions ? Or is it losing charm ?

3.JMS可以取代CORBA的各个方面吗?

3.Does JMS can replace every aspect of CORBA ?

推荐答案

拉蒙·吉尔·莫雷诺(Ramon Gil Moreno)正确地指出了

Ramon Gil Moreno is right in stating that

JMS是Java API，允许构建应用程序发送和发送 接收消息. IBM MQ或ActiveMQ是JMS供应商的样本，这些供应商 实现此API.

JMS is the Java API that allows building applications to send and receive messages. IBM MQ or ActiveMQ are samples of JMS vendors that implements this API.

另一方面，

CORBA是一个规范，它指定对象如何通过编程语言和运行时平台通过网络相互交互.

CORBA on the other hand is a specification that specifies how objects can interact with each other over a network across programming languages and run-time platforms.

该标准包括许多API和基础结构定义(语言绑定，编组，命名等)，这些都是支持此功能所必需的. CORBA仍在使用，既是开源的又是商业的(很难找到！)

The standard includes many APIs and infrastructure definitions (language bindings, marshalling, naming etc.), that are needed to support this. CORBA is still being used, and is Open Source as well as commercial (hard to find!)

存在实施方式，但我怀疑其中任何一项是否涵盖标准的10％.拉蒙关于CORBA更接近RMI的说法有点太简单-CORBA 2.4+定义包括一个CORBA Messaging定义，该定义允许异步和(可靠的)排队通信.

Implementations exist, but I doubt if any of them covers 10% of the standard. Ramon's statement that CORBA is closer to RMI is a bit too simple - CORBA 2.4+ definitions include a CORBA Messaging definition that allows asynchronous and (reliable) queued communication.

这篇关于JMS和CORBA之间的区别?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！