[rabbitmq-discuss] Exchanges, Routing, and AMQP

[Matthias Radestock]

Kirk,

Kirk Wylie wrote:
>> I think it may not necessary be a good idea to de-characterize an
>> exchange to the extent that it merely represents a logical address. If
>> you were to do so, you would be automatically precluding semantics
>> that you could efficiency build into a custom exchange (e.g. an
>> exchange that delivers to a subset of the matching binding - for
>> example the shortest queue).
> 
> Well, you're talking about a custom routing rule, and conflating that
> with an exchange. Custom routing rules are great, and orthogonal to
> Exchanges if you decouple exchanges from routing, which is what I'd
> really prefer.

Would your proposed model allow for routing decisions that are based on 
the set of all bindings (or some subset thereof), rather than each 
individual binding? Ben's example - an exchange that routes to the 
shorted queue - requires the former.


Matthias.