On 5 July 2013 15:50, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/05/2013 02:32 PM, Rob Godfrey wrote: > >> the method of implementing "flow control" (delaying completions >> rather than using the protocol defined means of simply not issuing >> credit to the sender) does not play nice with the client >> > > For AMQP 0-10 there is no protocol defined credit based scheme that works > for publishers. No 0-10 client (that I know of) has any notion of credit > for sending, nor is there any standard way of requesting such credit if > they did and the granularity of message-flow would mean credit could only > be granted per exchange if the broker was to issue credit. > > It depends on what you mean by "works", but I believe message flow should be able to be used (note destination is optional), however obviously the granularity is flow controlling the entire session rather than an individual destination (which is a difficult concept to define in 0-x anyway). When implementing flow control in 0-10 in the Java broker this is what I initially implemented, only to find that the JMS client had been designed to "work" with the delayed completions scheme.
> (AMQP 1.0 of course does provide a symmetric mechanism that can be used > for producers as well as consumers.) > > Indeed :-) -- Rob > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected].**org<[email protected]> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
