On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Gordon Sim <g...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 11/17/2011 04:57 PM, Ken Giusti wrote: >> >> Hi Justin, >> >> Would it be possible to include the fix for QPID-3626 in the upcoming rc? >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-3626 >> >> Without it, any python client that would like to access the timestamp >> would have to revert to using the old client API, something we don't want to >> encourage going forward. > > I'm in favour of this as (a) it helps keep the messaging API clients > consistent rather than letting them diverge and (b) it is very low risk.
I'm fine with this change as well. However I'm not too keen to introduce the change in the JMS client to use a custom property to carry the JMS timestamp for this particular release. There is some evidence that the increase in message properties have an adverse impact on performance. However we should include the change in the JMS client for the next release and hopefully we would have a chance to address the perf issue related to message properties. Regards, Rajith > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
