[rabbitmq-discuss] Publisher confirms requires seperate call to get ack?

[Ryan Brown]

Thank you Simon. That is what I thought. But the Notes section confuses me
a bit:

"The broker loses persistent messages if it crashes before said messages
are written to disk. Under certain conditions, this causes the broker to
behave in surprising ways...."

I assume this indicates that an ack will not be recieved by the publisher
thus, the publisher should attempt re-publishing. Correct?

Best,

Ryan


On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Simon MacMullen <simon at rabbitmq.com> wrote:

> On 07/01/14 17:56, Ryan Brown wrote:
>
>> So, question (hopefully responding to this old post is ok). When I
>> receive a basic.ack, does that confirm that the message has been written
>> to disk? Or is that just an ack that one of the rabbit nodes has
>> accepted the publish? My SLA requires the former. One of my coworkers
>> recalled seeing something that indicated a separate call to confirm the
>> write to disk. (I am having a hard time finding that article at the
>> moment.)
>>
>
> See http://www.rabbitmq.com/confirms.html#when
>
> So a basic.ack confirms that the message has been written to disc
> (assuming that the message got routed, and was persistent in the first
> place). If mirrored queues are in use the ack will not be issued until all
> mirrors have written the message.
>
> Cheers, Simon
>
> --
> Simon MacMullen
> RabbitMQ, Pivotal
>



-- 
-rb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20140107/93acd81c/attachment.html>