Open Stack

On 22/08/13 16:29 +0000, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
>> What was wrong with qpid, rabbitmq, activemq, zeromq, ${your favorite
>> queue here} that required marconi?
>
>That's a good question. The features supported by AMQP brokers, ZMQ, and Marconi certainly do overlap in some areas. At the same time, however, each of these options offer distinct features that may or may not align with what a web developer is trying to accomplish.
>
>Here are a few of Marconi's unique features, relative to the other options you mentioned:
>
>  *  Multi-tenant
>  *  Keystone integration
>  *  100% Python
>  *  First-class, stateless, firewall-friendly HTTP(S) transport driver
>  *  Simple protocol, easy for clients to implement
>  *  Scales to an unlimited number of queues and clients
>  *  Per-queue stats, useful for monitoring and autoscale
>  *  Tag-based message filtering (planned)
>
>Relative to SQS, Marconi:
>
>  *  Is open-source and community-driven
>  *  Supports private and hybrid deployments
>  *  Offers hybrid pub-sub and producer-consumer semantics
>  *  Provides a clean, modern HTTP API
>  *  Can route messages to multiple queues (planned)
>  *  Can perform custom message transformations (planned)
>

I'd also add that Marconi is being developed as a cloud service and
not just as a cloud software. That means, it aims to give users an
easy way to setup a queue service and offer that to users - internal,
external, hybrid - without struggling with common issues like
auth,scaling, firewals, APIs and libraries. This fits perfectly with
OpenStack mission.

I'd also like everyone to think about upcoming features as well and
what's in the roadmap. Marconi will also provide different transports
- next in the queue is ZMQ - and it will also sit on top of some
existing MB - we've plan to use rabbit, proton and other
technologies as storage backend. 

Also, Marconi will not provide just queues but also notifications.

Hope this helps clarifying the purpose of this project.

Cheers,
FF

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco