2008/12/11 mmocnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > James.Strachan wrote: >> >> 2008/12/11 mmocnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> >>> James.Strachan wrote: >>>> >>>>> [...] >>>> though I think putting redelivered messages at the tail of the queue >>>> (so its dispatched last) is what you want - so resending the message >>>> rather than rolling back & closing is probably more suitable >>>> >>> Yes, that is what I want to achieve, but if I do it that way I'm loosing >>> the >>> benefits of redelivery by ActiveMQ: >>> - RedeliveryDelay (with exponentialBackoff) >>> - RedeliveryLimit >> >> But those don't matter if the next message you are processing is a >> totally different message? >> >> -- >> James >> ------- >> http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ >> >> Open Source Integration >> http://fusesource.com/ >> >> > > Well, not for the next message, but for the message I want to resend.
Sending the message to be rolled back to the head of the queue will add a delay (since consumers will have to process all pending messages first). If you want an explicit delay before republishing the message I'd suggest using Camel with the delayer... http://activemq.apache.org/camel/delayer.html so you'd send to the delay queue with some timeout; then the delayer could then route it back to the queue -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com/
