[Prev] Thread [Next] |
[Prev] Date [Next]
[Orbited] Re: Orbited + ActiveMQ vs ActiveMQ's ajax + ActiveMQ
Wed Jun 17 02:01:01 2009
According to ActiveMQ's AjaxServlet page<http://activemq.apache.org/ajax.html>,
the official AMQ solution is polling. Orbited uses streaming in most cases,
and falls back to long-polling (using polling only for certain mobile
devices). This, I would say, is the major difference. Polling means higher
latency and greater resource consumption on the server.
On the other hand, if you go with AMQ polling, you won't have to install
Python or Twisted, which just might save you a battle with IT (I've worked
with sysadmins who don't allow Python!). Also, you'll only have to run one
server, which could conceivably simplify deployment.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Ivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am looking for a performant technology to build a scalable solution
> for 'near' real-time updates in the web browser with a
> publish/subscribe broker. From what I've researched so far it seems
> Orbited + ActiveMQ is very close to what I was looking for (I do like
> the very small footprint of Orbited a lot!). Then I found out that
> ActiveMQ provides its own ajax mechanism for real-time updates. so I
> was wondering what is the benefit of having orbited + activemq rather
> than only activemq. There is no additional backend to integrate, so
> flexibility is not of great importance here. Is the TCPSocket
> implementation of Orbited better than the ajax solution from ActiveMQ?
> How exactly?
> Thanks a lot,
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Orbited discussion group.
To post, send email to
To unsubscribe, send email to
For more options, visit