[rabbitmq-discuss] Dead-Lettering Performance
hamsterready at gmail.com
Fri Mar 22 11:05:15 GMT 2013
On 21 March 2013 13:19, Emile Joubert <emile at rabbitmq.com> wrote:
> On 20/03/13 15:11, Maciej Lopacinski wrote:
>> My question:
>> - is it valid use of message expiration time?
> It is valid to use TTL to implement delayed delivery. Whether it will
> meet your expectations in this case is hard to say. If a message (to be
> delayed by 110s) is published before another message (to be delayed by
> 10s) to the same queue then they will be expired almost simultaneously
> after 110s.
Yes, I am aware of this and in my case I can change "queues granularity".
>> - are there any caveats around dead-lettering performance?
> Dead-lettering a large number of messages could cause a spike in memory use.
Thanks for this, good to know.
>> - are there any guarantees around dead-lettering performance?
> I'm not sure what kind of guarantee you require. The possible memory
> spike will be fixed in a future release.
>> - does dead-lettering has same "priority" as others "internal
>> operations" in RabbitMQ broker?
> The Erlang scheduler treats processes performing dead-lettering the same
> as all the other broker processes.
Thank you for your reply Emile.
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss