[rabbitmq-discuss] Zombie direct exchanges

Rosa, Andrea andrea.rosa at hp.com
Mon Dec 5 13:55:57 GMT 2011

Thanks Simon,

I found this topic really useful for me!
Andrea Rosa

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon MacMullen [mailto:simon at rabbitmq.com]
> Sent: 05 December 2011 13:49
> To: Rosa, Andrea
> Cc: rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] Zombie direct exchanges
> 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.
> Cheers, Simon
> --
> Simon MacMullen
> RabbitMQ, VMware

More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list