Robert Greig wrote:
I seem to recall that we bind both to the unnamed exchange and
amq.direct. There was a lot of debate at the time about this (well I
argued about it!). I was and still am of the opinion that the unnamed
exchange is pointless and confusing and introduced for a very bad
reason - namely treating the protocol as an API.

Yes, there is always a binding to the default exchange for each queue, using the queue name as the binding key. This is created automatically by the broker and the bindings from the default exchange cannot be altered (except indirectly through the creation and deletion of queues).

The default exchange in my view is that it provides an error free direct addressing mode for queues and avoids the need for any explicit bindings in that simple case. To me that has value.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]

Reply via email to