This is interesting. I am not too familiar with ActiveMQ, and I just took a look at http://activemq.apache.org/masterslave.html that describes the master/slave configurations. To this point I have taken for granted that we have distributed messaging. But I have to ask, how are we planning on setting up/configuring distributed messaging?

Storm does require ZooKeeper and Spark has a cluster manager component which can be ZooKeeper.

On May 13, 2015, at 8:01 AM, Michael Burman <miburman@redhat.com> wrote:

Hi,

More like the bus is only a JMS topic with "distributed" not meaning probably what you hoped for. Since it's based on the ActiveMQ5 it's in HA configuration a single broker with master/slave (which with replicated LevelDB storage would then have ZooKeeper and everything else that's massively complex to manage). So nothing like the networks created by Hazelcast (eg. Vert.x underlying messaging infrastructure) / Storm / Spark / Cassandra / etc.

These restrictions create their own headache when it comes to scaling in Kubernetes for example, but I don't think we need to solve this issue quite yet. Creating components without locking them to a JMS is the key forward however as that would allow changing the implementation if requirements dictate such in the future.

 - Micke

----- Original Message -----
From: "Juraci Paixão Kröhling" <jpkroehling@redhat.com>
To: hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 1:03:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] The components, glue and kettle

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 05/13/2015 11:53 AM, Michael Burman wrote:
I disagree with the fact where the actual bus-integration component
should reside. The components themselves should have the
capabilities of allowing another component to connect to their
internal "feeds" but the actual component -> bus  connector should
be in the Kettle-repository. Why? The bus-connector is highly
dependent on the actual bus implementation. If we would change the
bus in any way in terms of implementation or API, it would require
changes to every Hawkular component (thus, they wouldn't be
decoupled by design) instead of only changing the implementation at
the bus-component.

I haven't worked with the bus yet, but isn't "the bus" just a synonym
for "a distributed JMS topic" ?

- - Juca.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVUyFhAAoJECKM1e+fkPrXKekH/2MFNSS+NYqP0v3uCNV3uY+J
/LYvrQptAXp/j0bUWkYR8rKPLedFTUiyZsZVW5DuwvwYEDMSDnlllaTKw2aQyawV
Z5xErHm4EYW+Q7cv5DO5ANZ3KZKufZhOlFxRYzG+zuZAoHNakWXgAhOqbW557l6R
AscC2EKGVmJQnFfjvw8aOaqc/Y2Bh/XuaMVfgGVeMXjpxSAzDP9iuxgfsXe4eEa/
gn0tSCVSPvWDfAKrEQOi5G35IKo0SuVVmM2rerww5CrPGXy2bLy25XC0RhXklhMW
f3D3ZbIk82Jl8QOOrJer3j2Py2t8s6nSTOPpyHf1+rI/qBICLPHMFvJ9ZgNpIlY=
=+U0e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev

_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev