[rabbitmq-discuss] Clustering Question

Mon Jun 8 20:41:01 BST 2009

Keith

As a matter of practicality we have found that 'eventual delivery'
(ie. what RabbitMQ currently does) combined with various 'lightweight'
forms of replicated flows, makes sense for many HA cases.  If you want
a combination of HA, reliability *and* timely delivery *and*
idempotency, then things get a little more 'fun'.

alexis

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Keith Irwin<keith.irwin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Matthias Radestock <matthias at lshift.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> Keith, Jason,
>>
>> Keith Irwin wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jun 5, 2009, at 9:11 AM, Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
>>>>
>>>> when you restart the node the queue data won't auto replay into the
>>>> cluster.  You'll have to do that manually.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that if an instance of RabbitMQ does down and is brought
>>> back up, its persistent messages won't be delivered when a consumer
>>> re-attaches?  (I'm not sure what you mean by "manually".)
>>>
>>> If that's the case, that seems quite broken and not fault-tolerant at
>>> all.
>>>
>>> Surely, I'm misunderstanding.....
>>
>> Persisted messages *do* get re-queued automatically on the appropriate
>> durable queues when a node restarts.
>
> That's good to know! In my research (thus far), about the only AMQP
> implementation I know of that does full replication across a cluster (or
> claims to), is Apache QPID. I'm trying to convince myself that trusting
> anyone's guaranteed messaging strategy is probably not that wise.
> Keith
>
>>
>> Jason, did that not work for you? If so, a test case would be appreciated.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Matthias.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> http://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
>
>