[rabbitmq-discuss] is anybody using tx?

Matthias Radestock matthias at rabbitmq.com
Mon Jun 27 16:02:33 BST 2011

What use, if any, are RabbitMQ users finding for AMQP's tx class?

The predominant application of tx we have seen in the past is as a means 
for the client to ensure that the server has accepted responsibility for 
a published message (or, conversely, be told of any failure to do so). 
Publisher confirms, which we introduced in 2.3.0, handle this much 
better. I suppose there might be still be users that haven't switched 
from 'tx' to 'confirm'. If so I'd like to know what is holding you back.

What else are people using tx for with RabbitMQ? And what aspects of tx 
semantics are you relying on? (Note, for example, that the tx specified 
in AMQP 0-9-1 is very limited. For example, atomicity is not guaranteed 
for transactions affecting more than one queue.)

Our current thinking is that tx, as it stands, is of very limited 
utility and that we are probably better off without it - it adds 
significant code complexity, slows down implementation of new features 
and is generally curtailing the evolution of RabbitMQ.



More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list