On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > I cross-posted this on the JIRA so I'll report it here incase anyone > wants a discussion :) > > > I think the JIRA title is perhaps a little misleading, given the > number of tests running that show it does work to an extent.
Actually it should have been (corrected now) does not work when using address strings. The fix for QPID-3539 was only added to the BURL part. > Perhaps 'doesn't work when used on queues not originally declared no-local' > would be clearer. The BURL usage may always send the queue declare, > but redeclaring a queue that exists wont make it no-local. My bad, the intention of the JIRA was to address the issue of no-local not working when using address strings. But it seems I have unintentionally highlighted the issue of no-local not working for existing queues. Speaking with Gordon, it seems, at-least from a JMS POV, that no local for existing Queues is not an issue. >From the API doc "NoLocal - - if true, and the destination is a topic, inhibits the delivery of messages published by its own connection. The behavior for NoLocal is not specified if the destination is a queue. " Since we obviously create the subscription queues for each topic at the time of subscription, at least from a JMS pov we can easily ensure that we pass the no-local argument when creating the queue. > The client currently only sends the no-local argument during queue > creation as you mentioned, but there is support in the protocol for > adding arguments to subscriptions so it could potentially be added > there too (The protocol actually has a no-local field on the file and > stream consume methods, so why it doesn't on the standard subscribe > method I'm not sure). I vaguely remembered something like this hence the question. Again speaking with Gordon I found the C++ broker does not support no-local being sent as an argument during subscription. However given the requirements around no-local for JMS I believe we can just get away with Topics and not worry about Queues. Rajith > Robbie > > On 13 February 2012 17:36, Rajith Attapattu <[email protected]> wrote: >> IIRC the no-local argument is passed on during queue-declare. >> But if you create a subscription with no-local=true on an existing >> queue how should we handle this situation ? >> >> Perhaps there is also a way to pass no-local in the arguments map when >> creating a subscription ? >> >> Regards, >> >> Rajith >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation >> Project: http://qpid.apache.org >> Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected] >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation > Project: http://qpid.apache.org > Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
