<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 12:30, Martin Sustrik <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sustrik@250bpm.com">sustrik@250bpm.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">Alexis Richardson wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Quantum mechanics may offer a way to avoid messages ever being lost, but<br>
I suspect that's probably not going to be sorted out in time for<br>
RabbitMQ 3.0.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
This would be renamed QbitMQ. �Delivery would be determined by opening<br>
a box. �No bunnies would be harmed in this experiment.<br>
</blockquote>
<div></div></div></blockquote><div>�</div><div>Thus spoke the CEO - end of discussion!</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">
<div><br></div><div><br></div></div>
Even better:<br><br></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">If message is missing, try to guess what was that the sender intended to send. Deliver it to the receiver. If it turns out later on that the guess was incorrect, cancel the transaction. Additional advantage is that you can get negative latencies this way.<br>
<font color="#888888">
<br>
Martin<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>It is good to see humour in discussions of this nature; it would be even better if those implementing the applications were to share the same humour! I suspect the world of open source is at times a different one to that which I seem to work in. Oh well, back to the drawing board.<br clear="all">
<br>---<br>John Apps<br>(49) 171 869 1813<br>