[rabbitmq-discuss] Reliability and AMQP

[Alexis Richardson]

Tanmay

Acks will be provided for any publishing party with an appropriate
'session' (new in 0-10) with the AMQP broker.  All brokers and in
particular exchanges will be able to manage a session.

To answer your last question: both direct and topic based routing will
be available inside a session, and the broker will be able to ack p2p
type cases and various pub/sub type cases.  Thus, delegation from an
unreliable sender to a reliable client *will* work.

I.e.: "What goes in, must come out".

Messaging from broker to receiving parties will be analogous, but will
not in 0-10 deliver 'reliable multicast' as is normally understood in
the literature.  Look forward to multicast support being introduced
soon after.

I'll check with the WG on what I can show you from the current draft
of 0-10.  As I said, it's an open spec.

alexis





On 8/22/07, Goel, Tanmay <tanmay.goel at intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Alexis, Matthias,
>
> Thanks for that information. I understand that 0-10 is not completely
> finished. But, could you point me to the changes/proposal for reliable
> messaging? Also, if there is a bullet list to the changes that have been
> made/proposed for the 0-10 release, it'd be great if you could send it
> to me or tell me where I can find that too. I would like to review the
> scope of changes to reliable messaging, among other things like
> transaction processing. For example, will the acknowledgement back to
> the publisher feature provided for all types of messaging, like P2P,
> Pub-sub, etc.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Regards,
> Tanmay
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: alexis.richardson at gmail.com [mailto:alexis.richardson at gmail.com]
> On Behalf Of Alexis Richardson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 4:44 PM
> To: Goel, Tanmay
> Cc: Matthias Radestock; rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] Reliability and AMQP
>
> 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)
>


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