[rabbitmq-discuss] Zombie direct exchanges
simon at rabbitmq.com
Mon Dec 5 13:48:30 GMT 2011
On 05/12/11 13:45, Rosa, Andrea wrote:
> Unfortunately I didn't participate to the original design of the
> system so I don't know which is the underlying idea. We can have a
> lot of temporary queues (like temp_queueA) and a lot of messages at
> the same time to have a single exchange (the default one) to deliver
> those messages could not be a bottleneck ? So maybe the original idea
> was to design the RPC using separate exchanges for having more
> scalability? I don't know it's just speculation.
It's possible that's what somebody thought :) But the built-in exchange
types at least are just routing logic which is executed in the channel,
there's no process there to be a bottleneck.
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss