[rabbitmq-discuss] Reliability and AMQP

Wed Aug 22 00:44:06 BST 2007

Tanmay

The kind of reliability that you refer to will appear in AMQP 0-10.
We have been working on this or over six months, along with others
from the AMQP Working Group.  It's an important future enhancement to
AMQP, and to RabbitMQ, and one that we are all excited about.

Existing users will be able to continue using 0-8 and 0-9 (which is
almost the same as 0-8), but for those who need 'acks', that will
become a built-in feature of the spec, and of RabbitMQ.

The 0-10 draft is not strictly speaking for general consumption, as
you might expect with a work in progress.  But we welcome commentary
and it is an 'open' spec, so do please let me know if you would like
to get involved.

alexis

On 8/21/07, Goel, Tanmay <tanmay.goel at intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> So, I'm still trying to understand. There seems to be reliability missing in
> the protocol. The protocol supports acknowledgements from the consumer to
> the queue but there are no acks from the queue/broker back to the publisher
> in any of the schemes (store-forward, pub-sub, etc). I mean, for example,
> the publisher sends a series of 10K messages to the broker and one message
> gets dropped/lost in the network before reaching the broker. The publisher
> will not get an ack and the broker will never know the message was supposed
> to come. Will problems of this sort be taken care of in the later versions
> of the spec or am I missing reading something?
>
>
>
> Are you guys working with the 0.9 version of the spec or do you have a copy
> of the 0.10 release since I couldn't find it online?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tanmay
> _______________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> http://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
>
>

-- 
Alexis Richardson
+44 20 7617 7339 (UK)
+44 77 9865 2911 (cell)
+1 650 206 2517 (US)