[rabbitmq-discuss] building chat

[Ram Muthiah]

Hi Ben,

Thank you for the answers. 

I don't mind posting to the list! No one answered my questions I posted in the list. Instead of repeating the same post in the list (what's the point in it?), I sent a request to you to answer the questions. That's all. 

Regarding XMPP, ejabberd, etc., -- yes, you are right. Any XMPP server implementation would take care of my requirements. However, AMQP was recommended to me because it was much faster and reliable than just XMPP. (I am not sure how much truth in it, but that's what I heard). 

We ran couple of tests using RabbitMQ for both multi-user chat and one-to-one chat. It works well. 

Regards
Ram




________________________________
From: Ben Hood <0x6e6562 at gmail.com>
To: Ram Muthiah <ram.muthiah at yahoo.com>
Cc: rabbitmq <rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2009 2:56:47 AM
Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] building chat

Ram,

On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Ram Muthiah<ram.muthiah at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I replied to your email last week and copied the list address also. I am not
> copying the list for this email because I am resending the same questions
> again.
>
> 1. Can I use this default exchange for both one-to-one chat and multi-user
> chat?

Many questions can actually be answered by the spec, e.g. this what
section 2.1.2.4 in the 0.9.1 version says:

"
Most integration architectures do not need this level of
sophistication. Like the amateur photographer, a
majority of AMQP users need a "point and shoot" mode. AMQP provides
this through the use of two
simplifying concepts:

- a default exchange for message producers;
- a default binding for message queues that selects messages based on
a match between routing key and
    message queue name.

In effect, the default binding lets a producer send messages directly
to a message queue, given suitable
authority – it emulates the simplest “send to destination” addressing
scheme people have come to expect of
traditional middleware.
The default binding does not prevent the message queue from being used
in more sophisticated ways. It
does, however, let one use AMQP without needing to understand how
exchanges and bindings work.
"

> 2.Is there any user/message limit on each exchange?

Not really. But what is you specific concern about this?

To be honest, I can't see any requirement that you have that would not
be best served by a dedicated chat server - for example a proper XMPP
implementation. It seems to me that AMQP/Rabbit *may* not be the best
choice of software for your actual requirements. Why don't you look at
something like ejabberd, enumerate the requirements that you have that
can't be fulfilled it and then consider augmenting it with Rabbit to
mop up the unsatisfied requirements?

BTW please do keep messages on list - it is unfair to the community to
go into private mode and it also means that nobody else can answer
your question - making the Rabbit team unable to load balance the
handling of questions.

HTH,

Ben



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20090901/8d774bac/attachment.htm