qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (QPID-7606) Generalise Queue|Exchange#alternateExchange as alternateBinding
Date Wed, 06 Sep 2017 06:26:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-7606?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16154871#comment-16154871
] 

ASF subversion and git services commented on QPID-7606:
-------------------------------------------------------

Commit 15bb758108a900c3ed4955d3a05de59b58b159c8 in qpid-broker-j's branch refs/heads/master
from [~alex.rufous]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=qpid-broker-j.git;h=15bb758 ]

QPID-7606: [Java Broker, WMC] Remove 'Dead letter queue' from Virtual Host UI


> Generalise Queue|Exchange#alternateExchange as alternateBinding
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: QPID-7606
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-7606
>             Project: Qpid
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Java Broker
>            Reporter: Keith Wall
>            Assignee: Alex Rudyy
>             Fix For: qpid-java-broker-7.0.0
>
>         Attachments: alternate-binding.tar.gz
>
>
> Queues and exchanges should have something akin to an "alternate binding" rather than
an alternate exchange.  From this we can simplify the DLQ implementation to remove the need
for DLEs (or at worst have a single DLE).
> Alternate Bindings could be modelled as {{\{destination, arguments\}}}.  A supported
argument might be {{replacementRoutingKey}} which if set could direct the routing through
the alternate(s) (This is separate - see QPID-7771).
> This work includes:
> * changes to the model object themselves and the routing algorithms
> * update the configuration upgrades to remap Exchange#alternativeExchange and Queue#alternativeExchange
into the new model.
> * the facility for automatic creation of a DLQ should be retained but it can be simplified
to not create an DLE exchange.
> * On upgrade, existing users' DLQ/DLEs must be retained as is, that is, there is no requirement
to eliminate existing DLEs.  This is because we have no way to predict if the users made additional
changes to these objects.
> * update UI



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message