Matthias / Simon, thanks for the background. �I'm not using the immediate flag, but I've considered using it.<div><br></div><div>Admittedly, I'm not fully aware of exactly how it works. �It would be helpful to have a better understanding of the semantics. �Can you explain what the publisher is notified of (if anything?) when there are 10 queues bound to an exchange named HighPriority, a message with immediate flag true is published to HighPriority, and 7 out of the 10 queues have the message consumed immediately.</div>
<div><br></div><div>-Randall<br><div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Simon MacMullen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:simon@rabbitmq.com" target="_blank">simon@rabbitmq.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>On 14/09/12 12:53, Randall Richard wrote:<br>
</div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Just curious, are there any benefits for removing it -- is it preventing<br>
/ complicating support for other features?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Well, the specific thing that we've bumped into in this case is that support for immediate is greatly slowing down HA queues. We could be smarter about this, at the cost of tangling the code further. So if we want to make HA queues faster (and we do!) we can either keep immediate and add a bunch of code at the same time, or remove immediate and delete a bunch of code.<br>
<br>
There are quite a number of places where we have notably greater complexity just to support this weird feature that (we suspect) no-one uses. It just feels very disproportionate.<br>
<br>
Cheers, Simon<span><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
Simon MacMullen<br>
RabbitMQ, VMware<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>