Jump to content

Talk:Message-oriented middleware

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 162.2.120.90 (talk) at 18:05, 2 June 2015 (→Proposed merge with message oriented middleware). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconComputing Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

MOM asynchronous?

"that relies on asynchronous message"

IMO MOM is not always asynchronous. -- annon - 11:57, 12 April 2006

I think that is dealt with in the Disadvantages section where most MOM systems have facilities to group a request and a response as a single pseudo-synchronous transaction. - annon 10:29, 9 October 2006

MOM by nature and definition is asynchronous. It can seem confusing because async communication can happen in real time. Also, to muddy the water further, some implementations use a MOM solution to furnish part of a sync request, which can lead one to beleive that MOM is part of a synch request.

Spelling 'queuing'

There seems to be disagreement over the spelling for queuing. can we please leave it WITHOUT the "e", which is the traditional spelling? -- Rbpasker 20:01, 15 July 2006


Theking2 (talk) 17:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC) I don't think there is a "traditional spelling" of the word queueing/queuing [[1]]. The difficulty being that it refers to both the mathematical theory and the more common line and the bus-stop.[reply]

Nope, spelling without the "e" is more than traditional, it's correct. Including the "e" is a modern oxymoron invented by part of the academic community, and is specifically used by them when discussing the theory of how things (particularly people) queue.

MOM Products

removed section per Wikipedia is not a directory. Wikipedia is not a repository for lists, directories or Advocacy of commercial products and/or websites. NPOV requires views to be represented without bias, this applies not only to article text, but to companies, company lists, products, external links, or any other material as well.--Hu12 18:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I think showing a list of the most popular MOM products is essential for most readers to understand what is MOM. But I agree that no commercial view or biased opinion on products should be emitted. (Pmerson, August 2007)

What about adding a list of open source & commercial products without any comments to keep it neutral? I agree it's a sort of product directory, but it has a real added value to the article and isn't a standalone list. The following list is not complete but could be used as a start point: Open-source

Commercial

I'll leave my post here for a couple of weeks before editing the page. --E Ficheux (talk) 16:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other standards that are worth mentioning

Brian Gregory 05:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theking2 (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC) I believe these products refer to Message Queuing products and not necessarily to MOM. Wouldn't a link to technology article Message Queue be more apt. After the Message Queue article is updated of course.[reply]

Johannes Kingma 19:35, 9 April 2008 (CET)

Is the "sponsored" link at the bottom of the page for the "Enterprise Integration Patterns" book legal? Can I post links to my materials too? (I'm still learning wikipedia rules and etiquette - please don't kill the Newbie) Brian Gregory 05:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brian, I agree. On 23 Nov 2006, user 65.87.179.138 added a link to a book advertisement (Enterprise Integration Patterns) to 4 different pages. Granted, those pages were at least tangentially related to the articles in question, but the site contained little information besides teasers. If we include links to all books that are somewhat related to the subject, the lists will be long and useless. It makes sense to include references to books if those books are primarily targeted to the subject. Fordsfords 23:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes people will no doubt try to use this wikipedia article as a promotion tool. Wikipedia:External links says Adding external links to an article can be a service to the reader, but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article. -- Harry Wood (talk) 10:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origins section misplaced

The "Origins" section of the article is well-written, and is definitely valuable, but it is about middleware in general and does not address Message-oriented middleware as a technical sub-discipline.

I like this section, but I think it should be moved to the "Middleware" article.

68.111.231.127 (talk) 00:41, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is message oriented middleware (MOM) = MOM allows the components of a client server system to interoperate by exchanging general purpose messages. A client application communicates with a server by placing messages into a message queue.The client is relieved of the tasks involved in transmitting the message to the server reliably.After the client has placed a message into a message queue,it continues other work until the MOM informs the client that the server's reply has arrived. This kind of messaging is called asynchronous messaging, since client and server are decoupled by message queues.MOM function much like electronic mail,storing and forwarding messages on behalf of client and server applications.Messages may be submitted even when the receiver happens to be temporarily unavailable ,and are thus more inherently more flexible and fault -tolerant than RPC.Examples of MOM are IBM's Mqseries product and the OMG event service.Web push technologies such as Marimba's castanet also full into the category of message oriented middleware .By Anurag gour 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.108.64.148 (talk) 16:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of how it works.

This article is too academic. A practical example of how it works would be a great addition. Eg where are the interfaces located? Do we have an agent/driver on each platform communicating with similar clients on other boxes? If so why do we specifically have message queueing servers? Or if the queues are maintained on message queuing servers, how do differing applications on differing boxes/platforms communicate with the servers, and apart from persistence, what value do the message servers provide? An explanation of how it all works is needed. FreeFlow99 (talk) 14:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with message oriented middleware

I am not the one who proposed the merge, but it seems like a no-brainer to me. My preference is to keep the hyphened title. 121.103.176.27 (talk) 01:15, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It should be merged into the hyphened title.--Sae1962 (talk) 14:02, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i agree with the merge, no preference over hyphens =) Danielneis (talk) 12:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the merge. Having the two dilutes both.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Message-oriented_middleware&oldid=665208014"