[rabbitmq-discuss] Pluggable exchange types (bug 22169) landed on default

[Tim Watson]

On this note, you might also want to take a look at https://github.com/tonyg/rabbithub for inspiring ideas.

On 22 Oct 2012, at 11:34, Tim Watson wrote:

> Hi
> 
> On 8 Oct 2012, at 17:49, edup_pt wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Great Post. For which i understand you talk about an exchange in client
>> javascript side, right? 
>> 
> 
> I don't think that's what Tony was saying actually. A custom exchange (type) would have to be implemented in Erlang, it's just that Tony points out you can break out of the Erlang emulator into something else (like spidermonkey) if you *really* want to.
> 
>> What i pretend to do is to have an exchange inside the same network,
>> meaning, if i have a main application in html/javascript i would like that
>> all others client browser's (in the same network) connects directly to this
>> main html/javascript  exchange (that is in the internal network). 
>> 
>> This exchange in client side will connect to other exchange that is in the
>> rabbitmq server for cases that the users are not in the same network.
>> 
> 
> It's an interesting idea, but this is not what pluggable exchange types are about I'm afriad.
> 
>> Im looking for this exchanges in client side for (java, html/javascript and 
>> other languages)
>> 
>> Any ideia that can help me?
>> 
> 
> Well from the sounds of things, what you'd *really* like is an AMQP node running in the browser. That's a very interesting idea, but not something that is likely to come 'out of the box' anywhere AFAIK. I'd suggest doing a bit more research into things like web-stomp first of all, to see if the messaging patterns you want to implement between (presumably browser based) clients can be achieved simply using something like that. But it's worth baring in mind that AMQP is a broker oriented protocol - certainly 0.9.1 is anyway - and so a broker-less model (where clients speak to one another directly) is not something you'll be able to glue together using the protocol.
> 
> It's probably also worth baring in mind that native AMQP isn't likely to run directly inside a browser any time soon, so you should really consider alternatives to get from the browser (clients) to a broker, and then think about smart integration patterns that would allow your clients to behave *as if* they were peers, despite the intermediary role of the broker in the network.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>> Thanks a lot.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://rabbitmq.1065348.n5.nabble.com/Pluggable-exchange-types-bug-22169-landed-on-default-tp14982p22415.html
>> Sent from the RabbitMQ mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________
>> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
>> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
>> https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
>