[rabbitmq-discuss] message availability after close without ack

[Matthias Radestock]

Tim,

On 15/06/10 18:49, Matthew Sackman wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 01:23:42PM -0400, Tim Cole wrote:
>> I have a bit of code which is essentially doing:
>>
>>   ==>  basic.consume
>>   <== basic.deliver
>>   # transient application error happens
>>   ==>  basic.cancel
>>   ==>  channel.close
>>
>>   ==>  channel.open
>>   ==>  basic.consume
>>   # no message delivered
>>
>> I would expect to get a basic.deliver with the same message as before,
>> since the message wasn't acked the first time.  I'm not, though.  Is
>> there more to it than this?
>
> Hmm. Can you isolate the code that is doing this - it really shouldn't
> be happening.

You may want to run your app through the tracer 
(http://www.rabbitmq.com/examples.html#tracer), which will produce a 
trace much like the above. If you do get a trace that looks wrong please 
post it here.

Regards,

Matthias.