[rabbitmq-discuss] Reliable delivery via exclusive queues

[Brian Reischl]

Mostly for convenience. I wanted to use anonymous (autonamed) queues, but 
not have to worry about cleaning them up later. *Auto-delete* might also 
fit the bill, but seems to have the same problems as *exclusive* as far as 
I can tell. I'm also just curious if I'm right about the behavior of *exclusive, 
*because if so it seems like a feature that should be used only rarely and 
very carefully. 

I'm thinking I might instead implement a naming scheme for the consumers, 
and use the *x-expires* argument to have the queues clean themselves up 
after perhaps 1 hour or so. 

On Monday, March 31, 2014 9:06:55 AM UTC-6, Alvaro Videla wrote:
>
> Hi, 
>
> Why do you need the queue to be exclusive? Perhaps you want exclusive 
> consumers? 
> http://www.rabbitmq.com/amqp-0-9-1-reference.html#basic.consume.exclusive 
>
> Regards, 
>
> Alvaro 
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Brian Reischl <brei... at gmail.com<javascript:>> 
> wrote: 
> > I'm looking at using queues with the exclusive option for distributing 
> > configuration updates in my application. However, I'm worried that using 
> the 
> > exclusive option makes the queue unreliable in the event of transient 
> > network problems. My thinking is that if the connection drops, then the 
> > queue is deleted along with any messages in it. My consumer will also be 
> > disconnected for some period of time while it reconnects and declares a 
> new 
> > queue & bindings, during which time any new messages will not be 
> delivered. 
> > Is that correct? If so, it seems like exclusive queues should not be 
> used 
> > for messages you don't want to lose? 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > rabbitmq-discuss mailing list 
> > rabbitmq... at lists.rabbitmq.com <javascript:> 
> > https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss 
> > 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20140331/aaa0edc7/attachment.html>