[rabbitmq-discuss] Strange behaviour of RabbitMQ or client when network problems occurs

[Matthias Radestock]

On 12/09/13 13:11, Haster wrote:
> so I can't guarantee that if I send basic_ack I won't send it again?

There's no 'ack' for an 'ack', so indeed you generally cannot guarantee 
that the server has seen an ack. There are ways around that, e.g. you 
could put the channel in transactional mode, in which case the commit-ok 
response serves an 'ack for the ack'. But that seriously impacts 
performance and doesn't address the broader issue of dealing with 
duplicates (which are unavoidable).

> And duplicated messages I have to throw out on application level?

Yes. I'm assuming you've read http://www.rabbitmq.com/reliability.html

Matthias.