On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/09/2013 04:40 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote: > >> If we use the following address with the java client you get an error with >> exchange bind. >> >> "myEx_headers;{create: always,node:{type: topic,x-declare:{type:headers}* >> *}}" >> >> However the exchange (or queue) is created, all though the bind fails. >> > > Is the client sending the correct bind? (Since the address doesn't > explicitly have one it should assume one where all messages would match).
No the client is not sending the x-match:all like the c++ or python client. I'm definitely going to add it. > > > When this happens, >> >> 1. Should we reverse the queue or exchange declare ? (in addition to >> throwing an exception) >> >> 2. Leave the exchange or queue as it and just throw the exception. >> >> We currently do #2. >> >> What are your thoughts on this? >> > > 3. In this specific case I suspect the fix is to send the correct bind so > that it doesn't fail. > Agreed. > > However in general if you have node level x-bindings and an x-declare I > don't think there is a need to make them fail 'atomically'. > Thanks, my view as well. > > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected].**org<[email protected]> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
