On 03/12/2013 06:12 PM, Connor Poske wrote:
My apologies if this has already been asked.
Why does the C++ client library not implement a timeout for send()?
We are experiencing a problem where a send() call blocks forever when an
exchange it is pushing to has a full queue. We are not in control of the
northbound receiving queues being created, so we cannot guarantee that the
queue will have a ring limit policy. This leads to the possibility that the
queue can become full, thus causing subsequent send() calls to the exchange the
queue is on to block indefinitely.
The Java and Python client libraries have a timeout parameter for the send()
call, why not c++? Would this be difficult to add?
It would not be entirely trivial, but neither should it be too
difficult. I agree it would be a useful addition.
One other suggestion however would be to check available capacity before
sending. If sender.available() returns 0 then you will block; if it
returns a non-zero result you will not. In some ways that leaves you in
a more predictable state. You don't timeout waiting for the status of a
sent message, you simply avoid sending it and take some other action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
