[rabbitmq-discuss] Passive versus active declaration of exchanges and queues

[Irmo Manie]

Since 1.8.0 the passive declaration is separated, taking only a name as
parameter and will not declare anything if the exchange or queue is not
there yet.
This does makes sense, so in theory, when wanting a passive declaration over
active, you would first try passive and then active.

Now the problem:

If passive declaration fails, it not only throws an exception, it also
closes the channel.

Questions:

- What is the added value of the Exchange.DeclareOk result?
- Why is there no API call available to check if an exchange exists (and
with which parameters) so that this exception can be prevented?

Cheers,
Irmo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20100629/347cfe66/attachment.htm>