<div>Are there any good conventions to follow when naming queues, exchanges, and bindings? �As I'm adding more queues I'm starting to think some type of naming convention would be very smart. �Just curious what other's do.</div>
<div><br></div><div>For now I'm only using a direct exchange type. �When should I be declaring additional exchanges vs. using the same (or even the default) exchange?</div><div><br></div><div>A pattern I'm seeing is I have an app-specific producer than sends a message to a generic consumer (used by multiple apps) but then that consumer sends a message to another app-specific consumer. �What I'm doing is passing the return queue name in the reply_to attribute. �I'm not passing in the exchange name -- so I'm just using the same exchange for every binding.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I also declare the exchange, queue, and binding in every component (the producer and both consumers). �I assume that's typical as it allows starting the components in any order. �Is that appropriate?</div>
<div><br></div><div>Finally, I have been naming queue and bindings with the same name. �Is there a reason that should not be done?</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div>-- <br>Bill Moseley<br><a href="mailto:moseley@hank.org" target="_blank">moseley@hank.org</a><br>