Why is a JMS product easier to install and administer than MSMQ or IBM MQ?

Why is a JMS product easier to install and administer than MSMQ or IBM MQ?

From your article on the differences between IBM MQ, MSMQ and JMS can you give me more detail on the following statement you made? Why is a JMS product easier to install and administer than MSMQ or IBM MQ?

    Requires Free Membership to View

    Login

    When you register, you'll begin receiving targeted emails from my team of award-winning writers. Our goal is to keep you informed on recent service-oriented architecture (SOA) and SOA-related topics such as integration, governance, Web services, Cloud and more.

    Hannah Smalltree, Editorial Director

    By submitting your registration information to SearchSOA.com you agree to receive email communications from TechTarget and TechTarget partners. We encourage you to read our Privacy Policy which contains important disclosures about how we collect and use your registration and other information. If you reside outside of the United States, by submitting this registration information you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Your use of SearchSOA.com is governed by our Terms of Use. You may contact us at webmaster@TechTarget.com.

IBM MQ provides static configuration tables. Every queue needs to be manually configured in at least two tables (sender and receiver). Clean room JMS products typically require only little static configuration, and can create topics and queues dynamically at run-time.

This was first published in April 2002

Back to top