ActiveMQ (was Re: Devel::Cover with Moose?)

[Ruud H.G. van Tol]

On 2011-05-25 09:19, James Laver wrote:
> On 24 May 2011, at 06:31, Daniel Pittman wrote:

>> It is, presently, the best of the options out there in terms of scale
>
> You mean apart from RabbitMQ? Rabbit is also the most full-featured of any of the free message queues I've come across.
>
> My personal experience of using ActiveMQ is "don't: it'll cause you headache after headache". The same could be said of RabbitMQ, but we were doing some fairly tediously complicated stuff there (stuff that I believe would be impossible under ActiveMQ). Having watched people fight ActiveMQ trying to get it to do simple things, having watched people fighting Net::Stomp to find out why messages were being dropped at random sizes and having seen just how many times people wanted to go to the pub after dealing with ActiveMQ, I've already chosen RabbitMQ again for my current project.

Anyone here who used Spread recently?

It is supposed to be faster, lower level, taking < 1% CPU.

http://www.spread.org/

http://activemq.apache.org/how-does-activemq-compare-to-spread-toolkit.html

http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/010511.html

-- 
Ruud