[rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ with WCF binding

116 views
Skip to first unread message

mayank

unread,
Oct 9, 2011, 4:24:39 PM10/9/11
to rabbitmq...@lists.rabbitmq.com
Hi

I am new to rabbitMQ. I am building an application where using
rabbitmq wcf binding, where the publisher calls the service method and
the message gets queued. When the service starts running it consumes
the messages and acknowledges them. The problem here is I want my
service to acknowledge messages on certain conditions.
I am able to achieve this when i am using the rabbitmq APIs to send
and receive message(not using WCF, just simple c#). But I am not able
to find how to do this with WCF.
_______________________________________________
rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
rabbitmq...@lists.rabbitmq.com
https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss

Emile Joubert

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:55:33 AM10/13/11
to mayank, rabbitmq...@lists.rabbitmq.com
Hi,

On 09/10/11 21:24, mayank wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am new to rabbitMQ. I am building an application where using
> rabbitmq wcf binding, where the publisher calls the service method and
> the message gets queued. When the service starts running it consumes
> the messages and acknowledges them. The problem here is I want my
> service to acknowledge messages on certain conditions.

What should happen in cases where your service declines to acknowledge a
request? Will the caller be left waiting for a reply that never arrives?

There is no scope for conditional message acknowledgement in the
rabbitmq WCF binding (see RabbitMQInputChannel for the relevant
implementation). If you want a service reply differently to some
messages then you should build that into the service contract exposed to
clients.

> I am able to achieve this when i am using the rabbitmq APIs to send
> and receive message(not using WCF, just simple c#). But I am not able
> to find how to do this with WCF.

If the flexibility you gain by using the rabbitmq .NET library directly
solves your problem, and you are not constrained to use WCF then I would
encourage you to do so.


Emile

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages