[rabbitmq-discuss] "local queue" ...."remote queue"

[Oren Shomron]

RabbitMQ offers persistent messaging over durable exchanges - * if you can 
get your message published in the first place *

The issue is what a publisher should do with a message when he is unable for 
whatever reason to reach the broker.

I feel that this is not a problem that should be dealt with on the 
application layer, but rather through the messaging infrastructure.

  -  Oren

On Friday, March 25, 2011 1:37:30 PM UTC-4, momania wrote:
>
> Rabbitmq offers persistent messaging over durable exchanges and
> queues, so I don't see where you are missing anything :-)
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Oren Shomron <sho... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have the exact same issue - I need 100% reliable message delivery, and 
> I'm
> > not interested in coding my own local persistent message queue for the 
> cases
> > when Rabbit is unavailable. There's a lot of extra complexity involved, 
> and
> > I'm surprised the framework doesn't handle this as it seems it would be
> > relevant in many-a-project.
> >    - Oren
> > _______________________________________________
> > rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> > rabbitmq... 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/20110325/4f2763af/attachment.htm>