Universal messaging: JMS vs native messaging with Integration server

Hi All,

Just wanted to know if there any advantage performance wise if we use JMS instead of native messaging in IS to connect to UM?

Obvious reasons to use JMS is it is a standard and easy to switch between messaging technology in future, but I guess there is an overhead of administration tasks of creating queues and topic and JNDI lookups.

What does SoftwareAG normally recommend customers for UM?


For your answers watch the video at the link below:


Hi V V ,

For the question you asked I will divide my answer in three parts.

As Universal messaging is a Software AG end to end messaging solution which support many protocols like JMS,AMQT,MQTT,LDAP,HTTP
and SoftwareAG (WM native Messaging).

And for IS to IS message transfer both JMS and native messaging are used but if you are taking about performance comparison then
JMS is getting little more points. however for IS to IS communication native messaging is recommended but JMS is also supported.

Our recommendations for the customers is to use WM messaging if dealing with Software AG Products. In care of IS is communicating
with third party servers or application like WebSphere, jBoss use JMS as it having open standard and there is no requirement of
webMethods knowledge for developers to integrate their application with UM .

Ashish Kumar

Hi V V,

As Ashish has already mentioned, we generally recommend wM Messaging for communication between Software AG products, and JMS if you need to communicate with 3rd party applications.
Performance-wise there will be no noticeable difference. However, we are able to optimize IS and UM communication more effectively using the native protocols, so you will see better ease-of-use and resilience when using wM Messaging.

1 Like

Hi, If you talk in terms of performance then there is a slight weightage goes to JMS when compared to native messaging. But rest UM is a big giant.