Tigase、Openfire 和任何其他开源 XMPP 服务器之间的比较
我也一直在研究这些，两者似乎都在 Java 中提供功能齐全的 XMPP 服务器。我知道 Tigase 是以非常模块化的方式设计的，还没有详细研究 Openfire。
我的预期用途是创建一个基于 IM 的自定义应用程序，为了方便起见，使用 XMPP，而不是打开我的服务器与其他 XMPP 服务器通信。
我试图根据以下内容评估我的需求，大致按重要性顺序排列：
- 文档覆盖范围和内容。社区
- 插入自己的功能有多容易
- 许可/成本 - 我不打算发布我的代码
- 成熟度和稳定性
I've been looking at these too, both seem to provide fully functional XMPP servers in Java. I know Tigase is designed in a very modular way, not looked at Openfire in as much detail yet.
My intended use would be to create a custom IM-based app, using XMPP for convenience rather than to open my server up to talk to other XMPP servers.
I'm trying to evaluate my needs based on the following, roughly in order of importance:
- Documentation coverage & community
- How easy to plug in own functionality
- Licensing/cost - I don't plan to release my code
- Maturity and stability
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（5）
如果您希望扩展到超过几千个并发连接，请不要使用 Openfire。
Tigase 在处理数十万个并发连接方面非常出色，并且针对 XMPP 只是外部接口的大型分布式平台进行了出色的架构设计。它的代价是文档相当糟糕。您经常需要去阅读源代码才能了解发生了什么。
Openfire 非常适合小型设置，它的 API 很简单并且有很好的文档记录。不幸的是，它的架构设计并没有达到接近 tigase 能力的程度。
Do not use Openfire if you expect to scale beyond a couple of thousand concurrent connections.
Tigase is amazing at handling hundreds of thousands concurrent connections and is wonderfully architected for largely distributed platforms where XMPP is simply the external interface. It comes with a price of rather poor documentation. You often need to go and read the source code to understand what's going on.
Openfire is perfect for small setups and its API is simple and very well documented. Unfortunately, it's not architected to scale even nearly close to what tigase is capable of.
Tigase 是 GPL（甚至版本 3）许可的，而不是 OpenFire 在 Apache 许可下......对于闭源应用程序来说，OpenFire 是可行的。
它是可嵌入的并且被证明是可靠的 - 数千个并发用户。它甚至具有与传统网络（如 ICQ）通信的网关。
我在这里可以看到的唯一缺点是它只能处理每个实例（端口）一个域，但是从您的描述来看这应该不是问题。
Tigase is GPL(even version 3) licensed opposed to OpenFire being under Apache license ... for closed source application is OpenFire the go.
It is embaddable and proven to be reliable - 1000s of concurrent users. It even has gateways to communicate with legacy networks - like ICQ.
Only drawback I can se here is that it can handle only one domain per instance(port), however from your description that should not be a problem.
我完全同意@Yuriy 的观点，Tigase 非常适合高可扩展性，而 Openfire 更适合为中小型企业运行聊天的小型新手 IT。我在我的博客 Tigase 与 Openfire 中对此进行了更详细的介绍。
I totally agree with @Yuriy in that Tigase is great for high scalability whereas Openfire is more suitable for small, novice IT running chat for a SMB. I have gone into more detail on this in my blog on Tigase vs Openfire.
Openfire 3.7.0.beta 已经发布几天了。
许多错误修复，现在还支持 Solaris 作为主机系统。
And Openfire 3.7.0.beta is out since some days now.
Lots of bug fixes, now also support Solaris as host system.
关于 openfire ...它似乎或多或少被放弃了，当然不是因为缺乏需要修复的错误；）
Concerning openfire ... it seems to be more or less abandoned and certainly not because of lack bugs to fix ;)