[Twisted-Python] PB vs JMS

Drew Smathers drew.smathers at gmail.com
Mon Oct 5 13:21:52 EDT 2009

On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:14 AM, <jacopo.pecci at gmail.com> wrote:

> I looked at PB for an architecture with one client distributing some
> processing to several servers. Now I came across JMS and I have seen that
> using ActiveMQ with the Stomp protocol there would be a good support for
> Python.
> Surprising I couldn’t find any article comparing the two technologies. I
> wonder if they target different problems (it doesn’t look to me).
> Is anyone able to sketch advantages of one solution against the other?
I don't think there is a good comparison between the two because they're
different technologies addressing different problems.  JMS is a messaging
middleware defined at the Java language API level (hence the need to for
STOMP protocol and similar adapting layers for use with Python or other
non-Java languages).  PB is a "secure, easy-to-use Remote Procedure Call
(RPC) mechanism."

For the system you're descibing it seems like message middleware is more
what you want.  Unless you want to implement your own load balacing, work
distribution and failover algorithms?  Another alternative to ActiveMQ is
RabbitMQ which implements AMQP, which a Python client can speak directly
without using a limited protocol like STOMP.  There's also handful of good
AMQP python libs including one for use in Twisted: txamqp.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://twistedmatrix.com/pipermail/twisted-python/attachments/20091005/0df5d175/attachment.htm 

More information about the Twisted-Python mailing list