[rabbitmq-discuss] a common-lisp amqp client
matthias at lshift.net
Wed Feb 17 23:26:19 GMT 2010
james anderson wrote:
> i had read the passages at the bottom of amqp0-9-1.pdf/page 35 to imply
> that, if frames are strictly sequential, they would also continue to
> exist. frames sent as 1,2,3 and arriving as 1,3 don't fall in my
> classification of a strict order.
Indeed the frames do all arrive intact and in that order. But that is
all happening within the context of a specific channel and in a specific
direction, i.e. client-to-server or server-to-client.
> the next paragraph on that page implied that there might be an
> alternative to using a zero-length frame to carry early termination
> information, but i could not make out any command which could be sent
> proactively to actually have the described effect without additional
> disruption. what kind of termination was this passage intended to imply?
No idea, and note that the paragraph refers to *aborting* the sending of
content, not terminating, so it wouldn't help in what you are trying to do.
> i had read the last paragraph of 3.1.1 on page 26 to limit, if not
> preclude, the actions which you describe. yes, there is a possible
> conflict between that paragraph and the passage at the close of 126.96.36.199
> on page 36, but the "MUST NOT"s in the earlier passage are neither
> lightweight nor contingent stipulations, and, as demonstrated, the
> practice most certainly removes information.
The content bodies referred to in section 3.1.1. refer to logical AMQP
method content, not any particular chunking of it into content frames.
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss