[rabbitmq-discuss] For speed, use Shovel or not?

[Alexis Richardson]

Gene

Would publisher confirms help? See our blog

Alexis

On Apr 28, 2011 7:01 PM, "Gene Campbell" <ristretto.rb at gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for the response.    Great one for a FAQ.  The confirmation of
batching and compression not being in Shovel is something we until now we
couldn't confirm.  (Therefore it's usefulness to us just dropped a bit.)

The value of being able to ACK back fast, and let a client continue on,
while giving some comfort going forward that the message will actually be
consumed somewhere after some length of time.  For example, if you can stand
1 minute of latency from publish to consume, but you're client needs an ACK,
it will need to store potentially large amounts of data (if your link goes
down) until it gets the ACK (link comes back up and message consumed.)  With
shovel, it can get a quicker ACK.

Thanks
Gene

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Matthew Sackman <matthew at rabbitmq.com>
wrote: > > Hi, > > On Sun,...

_______________________________________________
rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20110428/e1bd08c7/attachment-0001.htm>