[rabbitmq-discuss] Message Aggregating Queue

[Tony Garnock-Jones]

On 28 April 2011 10:32, Alvaro Videla <videlalvaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> do you think is a good idea to specify backing queue implementation during
> 'queue.declare'?
>

It seems to me like it's *very* clearly the Right Thing to do.

Exchanges and queues are similar in a lot of ways; in particular, they can
be seen as special cases of a more general kind of lump of functionality, so
being able to specify exchange types is a clue that being able to specify
queue types might also be useful.

More generally, AMQP in some sense wants to be a model of a
named-soup-of-objects-in-the-broker (hence AMQP 1.0's approach, as I
understand it), so from this point of view having named classes (fanout
exchange, direct exchange, queue-backed-by-rabbit, queue-backed-by-riak,
etc) and as generic a factory/constructor method as possible (in 0-9-1
unavoidably split into at least exchange.declare and queue.declare) makes a
fair bit of sense.

Regards,
  Tony
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20110428/635d9685/attachment.htm>