[rabbitmq-discuss] Bound Queues

[Dan Di Spaltro]

ttl's on a queue level would be very useful to us

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Tony Garnock-Jones <tonyg at lshift.net> wrote:
> Garrett Smith wrote:
>> FWIW, the qpid server does respect the ttl message property and this
>> condition is easier to manage as a result. I'm a fan of ttl as it's
>> application specific (producers get to chose how long their messages
>> should live) and provides a reasonable heuristic for deleting messages
>> that aren't consumed in a timely manner.
>
> And as it happens, ttl is one of the key controls of reliable delivery: in
> order to achieve reliable delivery, you need to be able to bound the lifetime
> of a packet in the network, so that duplicates don't outlive their
> deduplication buffer entries.
>
> I think implementing ttl is important. We could build a dumb form of it quickly
> enough, where as a message is considered for delivery its ttl is checked, but
> the real challenge lies in collecting expired messages while they're idle.
> Per-message ttls aggravate the problem: if only it were a per *queue* ttl, it'd
> be so much easier!
>
> Tony
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> http://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
>



-- 
Dan Di Spaltro