[rabbitmq-discuss] Unexaplainable behaviour with shovel plugin.

Ben Hood 0x6e6562 at gmail.com
Fri Feb 28 18:14:33 GMT 2014


On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Laing, Michael
<michael.laing at nytimes.com> wrote:
> So I turned to shovels for more simplicity and control at the expense of
> more difficult configuration.

Yes, it is quite a low level tool, but I guess sometimes your
requirements are intricate enough to need to reach down to the lower

> Some of our core clusters support the 'retail' layer of instances that
> gateway to clients (candles?). We are introducing federation into one of
> these communication links because we want the propagation of client bindings
> from the gateway instance to the core - an excellent feature of federation
> and an important refinement for us.

Using federation to implement an AMQP gateway seems like a common
pattern. One wonders why it didn't go into the AMQP spec ....

> Initially I had thought that the 'new' federation replaced the 'old' shovel,
> but this is not true - each tool has its place although their capabilities
> overlap.
> With easier configuration in 3.3, the lowly shovel may get its due!

It's interesting to see that the shovel still lives on, despite it
being quite an agricultural component. What sort of message volumes
are you guys processing with this, BTW?

Thanks for being so detailed about your experiences, it's much appreciated.



More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list