[rabbitmq-discuss] py-amqplib status messages
Peter.Silva at ec.gc.ca
Fri Nov 21 16:46:53 GMT 2008
Ben Hood wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:27 PM, tsuraan <tsuraan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why are you using tx in the above? It won't do any harm, but it doesn't
>>> seem to serve any purpose.
>> It's a stripped-down version of a larger program that does use a
>> transaction in a less wasteful fashion.
> That still doesn't explain why you're using it though. It is for
> intents and purposes, a semantic NOOP.
>> Yup, putting in chan.close() and conn.close() gets all the messages
>> delivered. Is there a way to ensure message delivery without using a
>> transaction or closing the channel? Some sort of flush method, or
>> another flag on the basic_publish method that I didn't notice? I've
>> noticed the wait() methods, but I'm not really clear on what they do,
>> or how to use them.
> I'm slightly confused. You're now talking about about the sending side
> but your code beforehand was an example of a consumer.
> As an aside, on the sending side, you could use the immediate or
> mandatory flags to get the broker to *indicate it's inability* to
> deliver a message without you having to use a transaction, but I'm not
> sure those are the semantics you want.
It sounds like he just wants to know at some point whether all messages
sent were actually received. The acknowledgements go on at the
protocol level, well and good. It isn´t clear how the client
application will ´know´
that the messages sent were acknowledged.
is there a configuration where ´wait´ will block until all pending
messages are acknowledged ?
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss