[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-5601?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13924078#comment-13924078
]
Rob Godfrey commented on QPID-5601:
-----------------------------------
bq. Is it possible we may have stored any bindings in the store for the default
exchange (named either <<default>>, "", or null), and need to get rid of or
ignore them in future?
I think that that would already have been an issue in prior versions, so I
think not (or if it is a problem, then it will be for users of older versions
too - as creating bindings on the DefaultExchange resulted in exceptions being
thrown).
> [Java Broker] The default exchange is not really an exchange
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: QPID-5601
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-5601
> Project: Qpid
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Java Broker
> Reporter: Rob Godfrey
> Assignee: Rob Godfrey
> Fix For: 0.27
>
>
> Although 0-x specifies a "no-name" default "exchange" that behaves like a
> direct exchange where the queues are bound to the exchange with a binding-key
> equal to the queues name... Given the advent of 1-0 it is perhaps more
> consistent to think of it as a "routing node" which will take whatever is in
> the routing key of the inbound transfer and use that to route to the
> appropriate destination (whether this be a queue or another node).
> As a first step to implementing this, we should change the implementation
> detail internally such that the "default exchange" is not presented in the
> set of "Exchanges" and doesn't implement the Exchange interface.
> For 0-x protocols we can "fake" it's existence as an exchange for operations
> such as exchange declare / delete / bind / unbind / query
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
