[rabbitmq-discuss] Fwd: question on the faq

[Carl Trieloff]

Alexis Richardson wrote:
> Carl,
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Carl Trieloff <cctrieloff at redhat.com> wrote:
>   
>>> If queue lifecyle were defined and its operations were atomic, then
>>> that would make it is easier for TX to cover all atomicity cases.
>>>       
>> ... so a queue that is created
>> during a TXN flow would outlive
>> a TX abort as it is not a transnational resource.
>>     
>
> Given that you are saying that a queue is not a transactional resource
> here, 

let me be specific, AMQP today does not provide a way to enlist a 
queue's creation or deletion into
a txn context. This in no way affects the ability to provide ACID 
transactional gaurentees on messages.

It does however imply some implementation details that need to be taken 
care of.
Carl.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20090105/e77109ac/attachment.htm