# Ruby friendly MOM's **URL:** \ **Category:** ruby-talk\ **Created:** [15 October 2006 23:20 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939 "2006-10-15T23:20:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![snacktime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@snacktime](https://rubytalk.org/u/snacktime)\ **Post date:** [15 October 2006 23:20 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/1 "2006-10-15T23:20:28Z")
I've spent a good deal of time looking for a ruby/python/perl friendly open source reliable messaging system without much luck. I know Francis is working on an AMQP based system, and I've taken a look at reliable-message but that's strictly ruby. ActiveMQ seemed very nice until I found out that the main connectivity to it from languages other than java (stomp) is currently broken, and it's overall stability seems to be a question. Xmlblaster looks fairly good and supports xmlrpc, corba, and even email along with it's own binary protocol. The rest that I found such as Mantaray, OpenJMS, and JORAM either didn't have connectivity outside of java, or had other limitations such as no durable consumers, etc.. I've also taken a look at just using XMPP, but all the activity around is it really centered on IM. Specifically what I need is a durable, reliable publisher/consumer message queue that also has either some type of distributed broker setup or even a master/slave architecture. With the emphasis being on reliable. Anything out there that I missed? Chris ---
**Author:** ![M\_Edward\_Ed\_Borasky1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9c0ed/32.png) [@M\_Edward\_Ed\_Borasky1](https://rubytalk.org/u/M_Edward_Ed_Borasky1)\ **Post date:** [15 October 2006 23:39 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/2 "2006-10-15T23:39:01Z")
snacktime wrote: > I've spent a good deal of time looking for a ruby/python/perl friendly > open source reliable messaging system without much luck. I know > Francis is working on an AMQP based system, and I've taken a look at > reliable-message but that's strictly ruby. ActiveMQ seemed very nice > until I found out that the main connectivity to it from languages > other than java (stomp) is currently broken, and it's overall > stability seems to be a question. Xmlblaster looks fairly good and > supports xmlrpc, corba, and even email along with it's own binary > protocol. The rest that I found such as Mantaray, OpenJMS, and JORAM > either didn't have connectivity outside of java, or had other > limitations such as no durable consumers, etc.. > > I've also taken a look at just using XMPP, but all the activity around > is it really centered on IM. > > Specifically what I need is a durable, reliable publisher/consumer > message queue that also has either some type of distributed broker > setup or even a master/slave architecture. With the emphasis being on > reliable. > > Anything out there that I missed? > > Chris Could this be hacked around the Erlang run-time, which is written in C IIRC? It's open source, after all. 馃檪 ---
**Author:** ![Ara.T.Howard6](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/958977/32.png) [@Ara.T.Howard6](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ara.T.Howard6)\ **Post date:** [15 October 2006 23:41 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/3 "2006-10-15T23:41:09Z")
google 'spread' think it's http:/spread.org/ -a > **路路路** > > On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, snacktime wrote: > > > I've spent a good deal of time looking for a ruby/python/perl friendly > > open source reliable messaging system without much luck. I know > > Francis is working on an AMQP based system, and I've taken a look at > > reliable-message but that's strictly ruby. ActiveMQ seemed very nice > > until I found out that the main connectivity to it from languages > > other than java (stomp) is currently broken, and it's overall > > stability seems to be a question. Xmlblaster looks fairly good and > > supports xmlrpc, corba, and even email along with it's own binary > > protocol. The rest that I found such as Mantaray, OpenJMS, and JORAM > > either didn't have connectivity outside of java, or had other > > limitations such as no durable consumers, etc.. > > > > I've also taken a look at just using XMPP, but all the activity around > > is it really centered on IM. > > > > Specifically what I need is a durable, reliable publisher/consumer > > message queue that also has either some type of distributed broker > > setup or even a master/slave architecture. With the emphasis being on > > reliable. > > > > Anything out there that I missed? > > > > Chris > > -- > my religion is very simple. my religion is kindness. -- the dalai lama ---
**Author:** ![Francis\_Cianfrocca](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@Francis\_Cianfrocca](https://rubytalk.org/u/Francis_Cianfrocca)\ **Post date:** [16 October 2006 00:23 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/4 "2006-10-16T00:23:12Z")
What are your interoperability requirements? Meaning, what kind of non-Ruby systems do you need to work with? Do you need something with a JMS interface? > **路路路** > > On 10/15/06, snacktime \ wrote: > > > I've spent a good deal of time looking for a ruby/python/perl friendly > > open source reliable messaging system without much luck. I know > > Francis is working on an AMQP based system, and I've taken a look at > > reliable-message but that's strictly ruby. ActiveMQ seemed very nice > > until I found out that the main connectivity to it from languages > > other than java (stomp) is currently broken, and it's overall > > stability seems to be a question. Xmlblaster looks fairly good and > > supports xmlrpc, corba, and even email along with it's own binary > > protocol. The rest that I found such as Mantaray, OpenJMS, and JORAM > > either didn't have connectivity outside of java, or had other > > limitations such as no durable consumers, etc.. > > > > I've also taken a look at just using XMPP, but all the activity around > > is it really centered on IM. > > > > Specifically what I need is a durable, reliable publisher/consumer > > message queue that also has either some type of distributed broker > > setup or even a master/slave architecture. With the emphasis being on > > reliable. > > > > Anything out there that I missed? ---
**Author:** ![snacktime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@snacktime](https://rubytalk.org/u/snacktime)\ **Post date:** [16 October 2006 00:20 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/5 "2006-10-16T00:20:35Z")
> google 'spread' > > think it's http:/spread.org/ I like spread, but it doesn't have durable messages and has limits on message size last I checked. Chris ---
**Author:** ![snacktime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@snacktime](https://rubytalk.org/u/snacktime)\ **Post date:** [16 October 2006 00:49 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/6 "2006-10-16T00:49:25Z")
> What are your interoperability requirements? Meaning, what kind of non-Ruby > systems do you need to work with? Do you need something with a JMS > interface? Just perl and ruby. What I'd really like is any kind of messaging oriented protocol that's easy to implement. Even something like XMPP would work fine. Chris ---
**Author:** ![Francis\_Cianfrocca](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@Francis\_Cianfrocca](https://rubytalk.org/u/Francis_Cianfrocca)\ **Post date:** [16 October 2006 00:56 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/7 "2006-10-16T00:56:33Z")
That's an interesting way to state it, given that the MOM world has always been torn between products that are driven by wire-protocols or by APIs, with the latter being the traditional winners. (AMQP tries to square the circle by specifying both, which creates its own set of headaches.) How would you feel about a RESTful approach? > **路路路** > > On 10/15/06, snacktime \ wrote: > > > \> > > \> What are your interoperability requirements? Meaning, what kind of > > non-Ruby > > \> systems do you need to work with? Do you need something with a JMS > > \> interface? > > > > Just perl and ruby. What I'd really like is any kind of messaging > > oriented protocol that's easy to implement. Even something like XMPP > > would work fine. ---
**Author:** ![snacktime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@snacktime](https://rubytalk.org/u/snacktime)\ **Post date:** [16 October 2006 01:10 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/ruby-friendly-moms/31939/8 "2006-10-16T01:10:53Z")
> That's an interesting way to state it, given that the MOM world has always > been torn between products that are driven by wire-protocols or by APIs, > with the latter being the traditional winners. (AMQP tries to square the > circle by specifying both, which creates its own set of headaches.) How > would you feel about a RESTful approach? As long as the perl/ruby http libraries can handle pipelining I don't mind a REST api. I'm assuming most of them do, but maybe I shouldn't. Chris