<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"><div>Hi Ben,<br><br>Thank you for the answers. <br><br>I don't mind posting to the list! No one answered my questions I posted in the list. Instead of repeating the same post in the list (what's the point in it?), I sent a request to you to answer the questions. That's all. <br><br>Regarding XMPP, ejabberd, etc., -- yes, you are right. Any XMPP server implementation would take care of my requirements. However, AMQP was recommended to me because it was much faster and reliable than just XMPP. (I am not sure how much truth in it, but that's what I heard). <br><br>We ran couple of tests using RabbitMQ for both multi-user chat and one-to-one chat. It works well. <br><br>Regards<br>Ram<br></div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br><div style="font-family:
arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Ben Hood <0x6e6562@gmail.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Ram Muthiah <ram.muthiah@yahoo.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b> rabbitmq <rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, September 1, 2009 2:56:47 AM<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] building chat<br></font><br>Ram,<br><br>On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Ram Muthiah<<a ymailto="mailto:ram.muthiah@yahoo.com" href="mailto:ram.muthiah@yahoo.com">ram..muthiah@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>> I replied to your email last week and copied the list address also. I am not<br>> copying the list for this email because I am resending the same questions<br>> again.<br>><br>> 1. Can I
use this default exchange for both one-to-one chat and multi-user<br>> chat?<br><br>Many questions can actually be answered by the spec, e.g. this what<br>section 2.1.2.4 in the 0.9.1 version says:<br><br>"<br>Most integration architectures do not need this level of<br>sophistication. Like the amateur photographer, a<br>majority of AMQP users need a "point and shoot" mode. AMQP provides<br>this through the use of two<br>simplifying concepts:<br><br>- a default exchange for message producers;<br>- a default binding for message queues that selects messages based on<br>a match between routing key and<br> message queue name.<br><br>In effect, the default binding lets a producer send messages directly<br>to a message queue, given suitable<br>authority – it emulates the simplest “send to destination” addressing<br>scheme people have come to expect of<br>traditional middleware.<br>The default binding does not prevent the message queue
from being used<br>in more sophisticated ways. It<br>does, however, let one use AMQP without needing to understand how<br>exchanges and bindings work..<br>"<br><br>> 2.Is there any user/message limit on each exchange?<br><br>Not really. But what is you specific concern about this?<br><br>To be honest, I can't see any requirement that you have that would not<br>be best served by a dedicated chat server - for example a proper XMPP<br>implementation. It seems to me that AMQP/Rabbit *may* not be the best<br>choice of software for your actual requirements. Why don't you look at<br>something like ejabberd, enumerate the requirements that you have that<br>can't be fulfilled it and then consider augmenting it with Rabbit to<br>mop up the unsatisfied requirements?<br><br>BTW please do keep messages on list - it is unfair to the community to<br>go into private mode and it also means that nobody else can answer<br>your question - making the Rabbit team unable to
load balance the<br>handling of questions.<br><br>HTH,<br><br>Ben<br></div></div></div><br>
</body></html>