A random thought from a non-contributor after reviewing the wiki a bit... In the wiki page the biggest issue described for RabbitMQ was the idea that it could not easily be partitioned without each node having a complete description of every queue.
I'm wondering if it would be feasible to separate the concept of "exchange" and "queue" onto different machines. This would be a two-level structure, where the lower level (the users or "queues") sends messages to the upper level (the groups or "exchanges") which forward the messages back down to the lower level and then to the users. If this model can be made to make any sense at all then it would permit partitioning of both users and groups without each node having to have complete knowledge. Of course one of the other major issues I see with RabbitMQ is that it doesn't save messages to disk except for disaster recovery. I hear they're trying to create a new persister that actually is willing to have some saved messages stored on disk, but otherwise I'm not sure I like the idea of messaging servers crashing whenever people hit their message cap... On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Erik Anderson < eri...@odysseus.anderson.name> wrote: > Hey, if you're looking for a review of message queueing agents, I ran > across an SL review of MQs a while back when trying to choose one for our > company's back end COMET server. It had value in my research and may have > for someone trying to come up with chat alternatives... > > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Message_Queue_Evaluation_Notes >
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
