A shared queue can be used in a clustered environment with multiple nodes running this Camel application at the same time. And you can optionally configure replyToType=Shared to make it stand out that shared queues are in use. To use this you must specify the replyTo queue name. The queue must be created beforehand, although some brokers can create them on the fly such as Apache ActiveMQ. And you can optionally configure replyToType=Temporary to make it stand out that temporary queues are in use.Ī shared persistent queue is used as reply queue. To use this do not specify a replyTo queue name. This has the effect of a local JMS transaction being managed alongside the main transaction (which might be a native JDBC transaction), with the JMS transaction committing right after the main transaction.Ī temporary queue is used as reply queue, and automatic created by Camel. Setting this flag to true will use a short local JMS transaction when running outside of a managed transaction, and a synchronized local JMS transaction in case of a managed transaction (other than an XA transaction) being present. Analogously, these parameters are not taken into account within a locally managed transaction either, since Spring JMS operates on an existing JMS Session in this case. Depending on the Java EE transaction context, the container makes its own decisions on these values. Note from Spring JMS: that within a JTA transaction, the parameters passed to createQueue, createTopic methods are not taken into account. With LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.Specifies whether InOut operations (request reply) default to using transacted mode If this flag is set to true, then Spring JmsTemplate will have sessionTransacted set to true, and the acknowledgeMode as transacted on the JmsTemplate used for InOut operations. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference Reviews by company employees or direct competitors.
#BACKUP EXEC LICENSE SOFTWARE#
We monitor all Backup and Recovery Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. See our list of best Backup and Recovery Software vendors. Veritas Backup Exec is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Acronis Backup, Commvault, Veritas System Recovery and Veritas SaaS Backup, whereas Veritas NetBackup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault, Azure Backup, Dell EMC NetWorker and Rubrik. On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veritas NetBackup writes "Short-term recovery options help our clients easily get lost data back into production".
The top reviewer of Veritas Backup Exec writes "Excellent backup capabilities with good technical support and a fairly easy initial setup".
Veritas Backup Exec is rated 7.6, while Veritas NetBackup is rated 7.6. Veritas Backup Exec is ranked 16th in Backup and Recovery Software with 20 reviews while Veritas NetBackup is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery Software with 48 reviews. More Veritas NetBackup Pricing and Cost Advice »
#BACKUP EXEC LICENSE LICENSE#
It has a lot of features, and the backup is better than most applications, so I think the price is competitive." "We purchased a perpetual license and perform SMS renewals." "Our primary complaint about this product is that it is too expensive." I think it's a little bit expensive but manageable. They weren't able to say, "Well, you're using this, and this is more expensive." In many cases, as we reduced our capacity and what we were using with Veritas NetBackup, our licensing actually went up, and they were often unable to explain why." "Veritas NetBackup is very expensive, and I think price is the main reason which some customers don't want to use this solution." "In terms of cost, it's not very good." "Licensing fees are charged based on the number of CPU cores." "The licensing fees are expensive." "The price of NetBackup is okay. We would then ask Veritas people if we've reduced this much and shut down these servers, why has our license changed so less? They were never able to give us a straight answer. For example, we had reduced by a factor of 40%, but our license only dropped by 5%. During the annual review, when we asked them about our licensing, they couldn't explain it.