[rabbitmq-discuss] Alternative to "immediate" in RabbitMQ 3.x

Tim Watson watson.timothy at gmail.com
Tue Oct 22 09:24:05 BST 2013

On 21 Oct 2013, at 20:52, Chris <stuff at moesel.net> wrote:
> If x-message-ttl is set to 0 on the queue, then what should be a message-specific option now effects every message on the queue.  This isn't acceptable for us.
That's only true for per queue TTL - you can still set per message TTL instead.
> If expiration is set to 0 on a message, the message will not be dead-lettered until it gets to the head of the queue (which could be a long time).
This however, is true. It's not clear that we could expire messages that aren't at the head of the queue whilst maintaining acceptable levels of per queue throughput, which is why that behaviour remains ATM.

> Question #2: Has there been any thought to supporting "immediate" again?  Or is it definitely a thing of the past?

There aren't any plans to reintroduce it at the moment.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20131022/3984cb73/attachment.htm>

More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list