I'm working with publisher confirmations, and I'd like to verify that my
nack-handling logic is correct. Is there some way I can make RabbitMQ
nack on demand, for testing purposes?


Thanks

Search Discussions

  • Emile Joubert at Jun 20, 2013 at 9:14 am
    Hi,

    On 19/06/13 19:30, Ty Sarna wrote:
    I'm working with publisher confirmations, and I'd like to verify that my
    nack-handling logic is correct. Is there some way I can make RabbitMQ
    nack on demand, for testing purposes?

    No, I don't think there is a simple way of prompting the broker to send
    a basic.nack. But there is very little value in handling basic.nack
    specially because the integrity of a broker that ever did send a
    basic.nack would probably be compromised.




    -Emile
  • Tim Watson at Jun 20, 2013 at 9:28 am
    Would the broker not send basic.nack on a channel in confirm mode if the message was un-routable?


    On 20 Jun 2013, at 10:14, Emile Joubert wrote:

    Hi,
    On 19/06/13 19:30, Ty Sarna wrote:
    I'm working with publisher confirmations, and I'd like to verify that my
    nack-handling logic is correct. Is there some way I can make RabbitMQ
    nack on demand, for testing purposes?
    No, I don't think there is a simple way of prompting the broker to send
    a basic.nack. But there is very little value in handling basic.nack
    specially because the integrity of a broker that ever did send a
    basic.nack would probably be compromised.


    -Emile




    _______________________________________________
    rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
    rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
    https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
  • Tim Watson at Jun 20, 2013 at 9:32 am

    On 20 Jun 2013, at 10:28, Tim Watson wrote:
    Would the broker not send basic.nack on a channel in confirm mode if the message was un-routable?

    Oh please ignore me, that's not the case!


    Tim

    On 20 Jun 2013, at 10:14, Emile Joubert wrote:


    Hi,
    On 19/06/13 19:30, Ty Sarna wrote:
    I'm working with publisher confirmations, and I'd like to verify that my
    nack-handling logic is correct. Is there some way I can make RabbitMQ
    nack on demand, for testing purposes?
    No, I don't think there is a simple way of prompting the broker to send
    a basic.nack. But there is very little value in handling basic.nack
    specially because the integrity of a broker that ever did send a
    basic.nack would probably be compromised.


    -Emile




    _______________________________________________
    rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
    rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
    https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
    _______________________________________________
    rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
    rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
    https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
  • Ty Sarna at Jun 20, 2013 at 2:44 pm

    On Jun 20, 2013, at 5:14 AM, Emile Joubert wrote:
    On 19/06/13 19:30, Ty Sarna wrote:
    I'm working with publisher confirmations, and I'd like to verify that my
    nack-handling logic is correct. Is there some way I can make RabbitMQ
    nack on demand, for testing purposes?
    No, I don't think there is a simple way of prompting the broker to send
    a basic.nack. But there is very little value in handling basic.nack
    specially because the integrity of a broker that ever did send a
    basic.nack would probably be compromised.

    As I understand it, in the publisher confirmations case the broker nacks with basic.return+basic.ack rather than basic.nack. And, I do need *some* special handling for that case, otherwise there's no point in using confirmations at all.


    If the broker only fails to ack in cases where it's completely hosed the handling can be as simple as considering the connection dead, disconnecting, and retrying this and all subsequent messages when/if we reconnect. Even so, it would be nice to test that logic.


    -Ty

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouprabbitmq-discuss @
categoriesrabbitmq
postedJun 19, '13 at 6:30p
activeJun 20, '13 at 2:44p
posts5
users3
websiterabbitmq.com
irc#rabbitmq

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2017 Grokbase