JMS 传输与 MQ 传输 [英] JMS transport v/s MQ transport
问题描述
我使用 Oracle Service Bus(OSB) 作为 MOM，目标 URI 是 IBM MQ 队列.我只想知道哪种交通工具是首选.OSB 提供了 2 个适配器，用于传输的 JMS 适配器和 MQ 适配器.有谁知道相同的优点和缺点是什么.TIA
I am using Oracle Service Bus(OSB) as the MOM, and the destination URI is a IBM MQ queue. I just want to know which would be the preferred transport. OSB provides 2 adapters for the same, JMS adapter and MQ adapter for transport. Does any one knows what are the PROS and CONS of the same. TIA
推荐答案
通常，通过本机 MQI 接口发送消息会比使用 JMS 更快.实际上，我怀疑您是否会看到真正的区别，除非您每天发送大量消息.然而，除了速度之外，还有其他事情需要考虑.例如，如果您不熟悉 MQI 应用程序，学习曲线将比 JMS 更陡峭.
Typically, sending messages via the native MQI interface will be faster than using JMS. In reality I doubt you will see a real difference, unless you are sending tons of messages per day. However, there are other things to consider than just speed. For example, if you are not familiar with MQI applications the learning curve will be steeper than JMS.
当通过 MQ 发送到另一个 JMS 目的地时，JMS 头信息被映射到一个 MQRFH2 头.MQRFH2 标头的包含是从您创建的 Destination 对象中删除的.如果目标是 JMS 端点，则包含标头.
JMS header information is mapped to an MQRFH2 header when sent to another JMS destination via MQ. The inclusion of a MQRFH2 header is driven off of the Destination object you create. If the destination is a JMS endpoint then the header is included.
我在下面提供了一个链接，解释了字段的映射方式:
I have included a link below that explains how the fields are mapped:
实际上，除非您每天发送数百万条消息，否则我认为 WebsphereMQ 上的 JMS 性能足以满足您的需求.就请求回复中的线程阻塞而言，我认为您无需担心这一点.默认情况下，WebsphereMQ 中的回复由单独的线程使用，而不是由请求线程使用.
In reality, unless you are sending millions of messages a day I would assume that the performance of JMS on WebsphereMQ will be more than adequate for your needs. As far as thread blocking goes in request reply I don't think you need to worry about this. By default the reply in WebsphereMQ is consumed by a seperate thread, not the requesting thread.
这篇关于JMS 传输与 MQ 传输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！
