Re:Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service
by tluyben2 on Wednesday November 04, 2020 @11:56PM
(#24995774)
Offtopic: we are evaluating rabbit at the moment vs activemq; rabbit won for one detail: we need delayed messages (ex. publish {...} in 2h) and activemq seems to support those clustered while rabbit only on one node, which does not fit the business case (we cannot lose messages). I worked with rabbitmq before and it was great but this seems indeed an issue. Someone here with some insights?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Amazon Launches New RabbitMQ Message Broker Service
by shinydevops on Thursday November 05, 2020 @08:37AM
(#24998095)
Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding your use case, but I would think you could accomplish this by publishing a durable message to a highly available, durable queue with no consumers, setting a TTL on the message with a policy to publish to a "dead letter exchange" that fronts the queue or queues with your eventual consumers. The durability flags ensure both message and queue survive a restart, while the high availability policy on the queue ensures that each node in the cluster has a copy. And I'm sure there are a few similar patterns that would garner the same desired behavior.
I'm not taking a position on whether this is an acceptable level of complexity for the desired feature, of course, just pointing out how one might accomplish it if Rabbit is otherwise desirable.