What’s the long-term value of MOM technology? “Value” to my career and to the /verticals/ I’m following such as finance and internet. JMS, Tibrv (and derivatives) are the two primary MOM technologies for my study.
- Nowadays JMS (tibrv to a lesser extent) seldom features in job interviews and job specs, but the same can be said about servlet, xml, Apache, java app servers .. I think MOM is falling out of fashion but not a short-lived fad technology. MOM will remain relevant for decades. I saw this longevity deciding to invest my time.
- Will socket technology follow the trend?
- [r] Key obstacle to MOM adoption is perceived latency “penalty”. I feel this penalty is really tolerable in most cases.
- — strengths
- [r] compares favorably in terms of scalability, efficiency, reliability, platform-neutrality.
- encourages modular design and sometimes decentralized architecture. Often leads to elegant simplification in my experience.
- [r] flexible and versatile tool for the architect
- [rx] There has been extensive lab research and industrial usage to iron out a host of theoretical and practical issues. What we have today in MOM is a well-tuned, time-honored, scalable, highly configurable, versatile, industrial strength solution
- works in MSA
- [rx] plays well with other tech
- [rx] There are commercial and open-source implementations
- [r] There are enterprise as well as tiny implementations
- — specific features and capabilities
- [r] can aid business logic implementation using content filtering (doable in rvd+JMS broker) and routing
- can implement point-to-point request/response paradigm
- [r] transaction support
- can distribute workload as in 95G
- [r] can operate in-memory or backed by disk
- can run from firmware
- can use centralized hub/spoke or peer-to-peer (decentralized)
- easy to monitor in real time. Tibrv is subject-based, so you can easily run a listener on the same topic
- [x=comparable to xml]
- [r=comparable to RDBMS]