AMQP 1.0的实现在哪里?等待会有意义吗? [英] Where are the AMQP 1.0 implementations? Would it make sense to wait?
问题描述
我正在做研究，以确定可以为我们的未来产品选择哪种消息传递解决方案，而我真的无法弄清楚这一解决方案.
I'm doing research to figure out what messaging solution to settle on for our future products and I can't really figure this one out.
有很多AMQP 0.9.1实现(RabbitMQ，Apache Qpid，OpenAMQ，仅举几例)，但没有AMQP 1.0实现，尽管1.0已于2011年10月完成.嗯，除了SwiftMQ [1].
There is a bunch of AMQP 0.9.1 implementations (RabbitMQ, Apache Qpid, OpenAMQ, to name a few), but no AMQP 1.0 implementation, although 1.0 has been finalized October 2011. Well, except for SwiftMQ [1].
从1.0开始阅读，似乎与1.0之前的规范有很大的出入，因此可以理解，对于工作良好的东西进行大规模重写的热情不高，这是可以理解的.实际上，我看不出为什么RabbitMQ和其他公司不会仅仅决定迁移到ZeroMQ而不是AMQP 1.0.
Reading up on 1.0, it seems to be a major departure from the pre-1.0 spec, so it seems understandable that there's little enthusiasm for a major rewrite of something that is working fine. In fact, I can't see why RabbitMQ and others wouldn't just decide to migrate to ZeroMQ instead of AMQP 1.0.
尽管如此，我仍然找不到1.0之前的AMQP规范的实现者对此有任何明确的表述，除了一些模糊的承诺，例如力争始终实施最新的AMQP规范".
Still, I cannot find any clear statement on that by implementors of the pre-1.0 AMQP spec, except some vague commitments like 'striving to always implement the latest AMQP spec'.
RabbitMQ实际上确实说
RabbitMQ actually does say
但是，某事告诉我，该声明更还不到3年，也就是说，它早于AMQP 1.0的发布.
However, something tells me that statement is more than 3 years old, i.e. it predates the release of AMQP 1.0.
那么，有没有迹象表明AMQP 1.0可以成为标准，除了主要的银行(和Microsoft)在背后支持这一事实之外?后者顺便说一句.没有自己的实现.
So are there any indications AMQP 1.0 could become a standard, except for the fact that major banks - and Microsoft - are behind it? The latter btw. without an implementation of its own.
AMQP 0.9.1似乎比1.0更加标准.
It almost seems like AMQP 0.9.1 is more standard than 1.0 will be.
好吧，这是 https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-amqp1.0 声明的状态为 prototype (原型)，半年内没有任何工作.
Well, there's https://github.com/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-amqp1.0, it's self-proclaimed status is prototype, with no work on it apparently for half a year.
[1]通过 Spring缺乏作者对我的SwiftMQ的第一印象AMQP支持，这就是为什么我暂时不考虑它的原因.我不想指望那个家伙的支持.
[1] My first impression of SwiftMQ I got by means of its author's rant on Spring's lacking AMQP support, which is why I'm not considering it for the time being. I wouldn't want to count on support from that guy.
推荐答案
根据
当前内部或云中不支持Service Bus使用AMQP，但是有一个网络广播解释了Microsoft在AMQP上的立场，这听起来像是将来版本中的重要功能
AMQP is not supported at present for Service Bus on premise or in the cloud however there is a webcast explaining Microsoft's position on AMQP and it sounds like an important feature to expect in a future release 所以: 等待会有意义吗? Would it make sense to wait? 我想可以肯定地说答案是:否. I guess it's fair to say the answer is: No. 因此，除了SwiftMQ之外，从最近的公告和声明来看，目前没有任何有效的AMQP 1.0实现，并且热情不高.我希望Qpid尽快发布该版本，毕竟1.0起草者是该项目的成员-但是，如果没有，那就像棺材中的钉子一样. So except for SwiftMQ, there isn't any working AMQP 1.0 implementation out there, and not a lot of enthusiasm, judging from recent announcements and statements. I expect Qpid to do the release soon, after all, 1.0 drafters are members of the project - but if not, that would be like the final nail in the coffin. 无论如何，AMQP 1.0并未被广泛采用，并且在可预见的将来也没有可靠的迹象. In any case, AMQP 1.0 is not widely adopted and there are no reliable signs it'll become so in the foreseeable future. 这篇关于AMQP 1.0的实现在哪里?等待会有意义吗?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！
尽管起初充满热情，
MS仍然不存在，并且在公告和最近发布 Service Bus for Windows Server 更新:MS方面有新闻，请参阅David Ingham的回答.the upcoming Qpid release (probably available in the next couple of weeks) will have 1.0 support for the JMS client and the Java broker，那是11周前.预测当然很难做出，但是事实上，它仍然不在这里.
MS still isn't there despite all the initial enthusiasm, and I could not find any mention of AMQP in the announcement and the documentation of the recently released Service Bus for Windows Server Update: There's news on the MS side, see David Ingham's answer.the upcoming Qpid release (probably available in the next couple of weeks) will have 1.0 support for the JMS client and the Java broker, that was 11 weeks ago. Predictions are of course hard to make, but as a matter of fact, it's still not here.
