Alexis<br><br>a) when the User A is not logged into server 1 or server 2, any<br>
messages sent to them by User B are discarded<br>>> Actually during this case no consumer would be listening to User A queue and hence the messages can't be discarded and would be queued in Queue.<br><br>b) but, when User A is logged in to server 1, any messages sent by<br>
User B that may be routed to User A are queued in Queue A, <br>>> No of messages increases.<br><br>
c) .... delivered when User A logs into server 2.<br>>> A large no of messages get delieverd.<br><br>It is a constraint in my system that I have to initialize consumer when User A connects to Server2.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Alexis Richardson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alexis.richardson@gmail.com">alexis.richardson@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Gagan<br>
<br>
As I understood from your document:<br>
<br>
a) when the User A is not logged into server 1 or server 2, any<br>
messages sent to them by User B are discarded<br>
b) but, when User A is logged in to server 1, any messages sent by<br>
User B that may be routed to User A are queued in Queue A, and then<br>
...<br>
c) .... delivered when User A logs into server 2.<br>
<br>
Provided that you can implement this efficiently (see other email)<br>
then the consumer at User A only needs to discard messages that are<br>
older than one minute, and that were not already discarded due to (a)<br>
above. �So unless the time interval between A logging into server 1,<br>
and A logging into server 2, is "quite long" then the 'timestamp'<br>
method adds very little overhead.<br>
<br>
Is that correct or have I missed something?<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
alexis<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 8:28 PM, GAGAN ARORA<<a href="mailto:gaganarora.itm@gmail.com">gaganarora.itm@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi Alexis<br>
><br>
> My system is similar to an IM system and is using RabbitMQ for presence<br>
> updates and have designed it in such a way that a consumer subscribes to a<br>
> queue only when it comes online.Now the issue is as stated by you there will<br>
> be a large no of messages ready to be deleivered when a user comes online.<br>
> Checking timestamp for each message will result in high cost.<br>
><br>
> There can be a solution in which a message can be published using immediate<br>
> flag. But it is desired by consumer to get all messages which are less than<br>
> 1 minute old.<br>
><br>
> Can you suggest some other solution for achieving this?<br>
><br>
> Thanks<br>
> Gagan Arora<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Alexis Richardson<br>
> <<a href="mailto:alexis.richardson@gmail.com">alexis.richardson@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Gagan,<br>
>><br>
>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 5:08 PM, GAGAN ARORA<<a href="mailto:gaganarora.itm@gmail.com">gaganarora.itm@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>> > Hi Alexis<br>
>> > The problem statement here is I dont want my messages in queue for more<br>
>> > than<br>
>> > 1 minute.<br>
>><br>
>> The easiest way to do this is for the client to keep consuming the<br>
>> messages from the queue.<br>
>><br>
>> However: presumably you want messages to be ignored in the case where<br>
>> (a) there is no consumer to get the messages from the queue; and (b)<br>
>> the messages are more than one minute old.<br>
>><br>
>> If so then: Have you considered putting a timestamp on the messages?<br>
>> That way, when a consumer starts taking messages from the queue, it<br>
>> can simply check the timestamps and throw away anything 'old'. �This<br>
>> solution works just fine when (i) you don't need real time accuracy<br>
>> ie. "about a minute" is just as good as "exactly a minute", and<br>
>> provided that (ii) there aren't too many messages to throw away.<br>
>> Judging by the document that you sent, both (i) and (ii) are true.<br>
>><br>
>> Does this help?<br>
>><br>
>> alexis<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> > I have tried expiration property while publishing a message but<br>
>> > later came to know that it is still not implemented. Can you help me out<br>
>> > in<br>
>> > figuring some alternate approach?<br>
>> > Thanks<br>
>> > Gagan Arora<br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 8:17 PM, Alexis Richardson<br>
>> > <<a href="mailto:alexis.richardson@gmail.com">alexis.richardson@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Gagan,<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 3:10 PM, GAGAN ARORA<<a href="mailto:gaganarora.itm@gmail.com">gaganarora.itm@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> wrote:<br>
>> >> > Hi<br>
>> >> > Is it possible to set message time out in Java client API, so that<br>
>> >> > messages<br>
>> >> > drop out from queue after some interval of time if nobody consumes<br>
>> >> > it?.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Not yet but this is a feature have been asking for quite a bit. �It's<br>
>> >> on our roadmap.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> There may be other ways to achieve what you want.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> alexis<br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> > Thanks<br>
>> >> > Gagan Arora<br>
>> >> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> >> > rabbitmq-discuss mailing list<br>
>> >> > <a href="mailto:rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com">rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com</a><br>
>> >> > <a href="http://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss</a><br>
>> >> ><br>
>> >> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>