[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-350?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13420562#comment-13420562
]
Sijie Guo commented on BOOKKEEPER-350:
--------------------------------------
Mridul:
Please note that the guarantees provided must be consistent across api methods
exposed - for example, similar reasoning applies to publish.
(1) is not supported in publish iirc.
Currently, only (2) is.
(3) can be inferred if the seq-id is returned : but there is no requirement
that not receiving it meant the message was not published (socket lost post
delivery or server death, etc) - as in, no transactional guarantees.
Which was the reason (and not to mention minimize hedwig changes :) ), we
restricted to (2) - make it inline with rest of api, while providing reasonable
assurance of delivery.
Having said that, as long as there is reasonable assurance that best case
effort was made to send consume request to server, any additional guarantees
would be better (but would have a higher cost, which needs to be factored in -
ack from server for example) !
> Revisit consume interface in Hedwig Client
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BOOKKEEPER-350
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-350
> Project: Bookkeeper
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: hedwig-client
> Affects Versions: 4.0.0, 4.1.0
> Reporter: Sijie Guo
> Fix For: 4.2.0
>
>
> the jira is used to revisit consume interface in hedwig client and to improve
> it to meet JMS provider's requirements.
> move comments from BOOKKEEPER-311 to here, which make discussion more
> clearer.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
