[rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ 3.2 and federated queues

[Mariusz Gronczewski]

I've tested it for a bit and have another question: Is federating
autogenerated (amq.*) queues planned (on current nightly trying to federate
those returns "queue name contains reserved prefix amq") or it is something
that should not be used at all ?

I'm trying to fix mcollective over federated servers, the original code
used very simple method of sending request to exchange with 'reply-to'
header containing name of autogenerated queue, and server then sent reply
to that address. Obviously that didnt work over federation

My first try was just replacing reply queue with direct exchange that
client subscribed to to get replies and it worked partially, over
federation when client did simple
"subscribe(reply_exchange);publish(request_exchange), but sometimes
messages were "lost" probably because server sent reply too fast (before
federation managed to subscribe to remote exchange.

Cheers
Mariusz


2013/9/27 Simon MacMullen <simon at rabbitmq.com>

> On 27/09/2013 12:26PM, Mariusz Gronczewski wrote:
>
>> Are there any roadmap or other info about when 3.2 will be released?
>>
>
> A month or so, probably.
>
>  I
>> was trying to fix one application (mcollective) to use exchanges instead
>> of queues (as in 3.1 only exchanges are federated) but then I noticed
>> that federated queues are planned feature.
>>
>
> ...but you can download a nightly right now to play with them.
>
> http://www.rabbitmq.com/**nightly-builds.html<http://www.rabbitmq.com/nightly-builds.html>
>
> Cheers, Simon
>
> --
> Simon MacMullen
> RabbitMQ, Pivotal
>



-- 
Mariusz Gronczewski (XANi) <xani666 at gmail.com>
GnuPG: 0xEA8ACE64
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20130927/f0fd2a06/attachment.htm>