[rabbitmq-discuss] Ordering of messages after txRollback()

[Matthew Sackman]

On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 07:33:09PM +0100, Matthew Sackman wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 11:28:56AM -0700, Oleg Zhurakousky wrote:
> > Right and that is what I am essentially asking. If txRollback on the consumer side is un-doing the ack (at least I can observe this behavior), I thought that there is a difference between how re-queue is done when simply not acking the message (to the back of the queue) vs acked message but rolled back (to the front of the queue). But i guess its already been answered in a way  that the spec is silent about ordering.
> 
> If you rollback in the consumer, and the transaction consists solely of
> acks, the messages ARE NOT requeued. The responsibility to ack the
> message remains with the client.

Sorry, that's misleading. It has nothing to do with the txn being
*solely* acks. What I should have written was:

If you rollback a transaction, messages for which an ack was in the now
rolled back transaction ARE NOT requeued.

Matthew