[rabbitmq-discuss] Fwd: question on the faq

Mon Jan 5 16:55:54 GMT 2009

Carl,

On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Carl Trieloff <cctrieloff at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> If queue lifecyle were defined and its operations were atomic, then
>> that would make it is easier for TX to cover all atomicity cases.
>
>... so a queue that is created
> during a TXN flow would outlive
> a TX abort as it is not a transnational resource.

Given that you are saying that a queue is not a transactional resource
here, I am not sure how we can be in apparent dispute.

However, as I said, please tell us how to improve the TX language.

alexis