What Martyn is describing is closer to what I'm thinking. It may even make sense to refactor rest into a protocol as a part of this.
I'll respond tonight with a few more details of what I was thinking. Thanks for the input so far guys! John On Nov 10, 2016 16:20, "Martyn Taylor" <mtay...@redhat.com> wrote: The Artemis REST API is already an independent service that layers on top of JMS. If we're adding this API to the REST module it'd be independent That said... this could be done as a protocol module (the protocol modules are pluggable) when deployed it'd then be managed by the broker. Just like AMQP or any other protocol. The benefit of doing it this way is that you'd have more fine grained control via the internal CORE API. Also means you can plug in to the security layer etc... it does mean starting from scratch though... On 10 Nov 2016 21:01, "Matt Pavlovich" <mattr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > How do you see the service layering on top of Artemis? A fully independent service with a "seen message id" repository, or a subscription recovery-style policy within the broker with a REST service on top? > > > On 11/9/16 11:54 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > >> >> All, >> >> One thing I see come up quite often when looking at cloud based messaging >> systems is the concept of a reservation (there's a couple of terms out >> there, reservation seems to describe it best). The reservation acts like >> this: >> >> - Client polls for messages and get some number of messages back. >> - When a client polls again, those messages are not returned for some >> duration since it read them. >> - The messages are not auto-acknowledged. >> - A second API is invoked indicating that the client has acknowledged that >> message, typically using some message id or reservation id. >> - If after some duration, a message was not acknowledged, it becomes >> eligible for reception again. >> >> I'd like to add this type of capability to the REST API for Artemis. What >> do others think? >> >> John >> >
