Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of james.strachan@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.182.190 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=ErpLZTtwPiI56fkIJkbVRd0Mgp2S0v4GyWrO21Q5szzjYGl656k9RkG6ElA4Gp5WeYzoNe+3ugNoKNjOiJ+32XATeoljO2LyzqZQXpfbIswie7ikqOPTAqE+cUMO5a9RDhYazqFE9RetGLFSNpZWcbSNhOz8mHG3+WOzBuI+6+o=
Message-ID: <ec6e67fd0608140017i7f117d16s681bc310633c13b1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 08:17:19 +0100
From: "James Strachan" <james.strachan@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dynamic message selectors and message scheduling
In-Reply-To: <NBBBJGEAGJAKLIDBKJOPGEIPJNAC.noel@devtech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <ec6e67fd0607182350t44867110qf70cc8d42661262c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <NBBBJGEAGJAKLIDBKJOPGEIPJNAC.noel@devtech.com>

On 8/13/06, Noel J. Bergman <noel@devtech.com> wrote:
> In the thread titled "RE: [Proposal] Blaze", James Strachan wrote:
>
> >  Noel J. Bergman <noel@devtech.com> wrote:
> > > Totally unrelated ... JMS has the ability to create a message filter,
> but
> > > one of the limitations is that the filter is applied when the receiver
> is
> > > created, rather than when a get operation is executed.  This makes sense
> for
> > > the push receiver case, but is limiting for the pull receiver case.
> Does
> > > AMQP have anything to say about this aspect of messaging, or does it
> stay
> > > strictly in the messaging provider space, and away from the client API?
>
> > Could you explain a little more about your use case - it sounds
> > interesting :). Do you only want to fetch a single message with a
> > different filter per message, or just change the fliter from time to
> > time. If its the latter then creating JMS consumers is pretty cheap &
> > you can use any JMS to do that. Though the former, there's no 'give me
> > a message using filter X' type operation.
>
> Sorry for the delayed response.  Been busy on many fronts.
>
> My particular use case involves selecting the next message in the
> destination whose scheduled time is less than or equal to now.  If there
> were a "now" operation available in the query language, I wouldn't have to
> change the selector, but the expression would still have to be constantly
> reevaluated.  And in that case, I'd want both pull and push behavior to be
> supported.

That should be pretty simple to add to the selector syntax via a NOW()
function (to avoid 'NOW' clashing with some property on the message).
Though the filter would have to be constantly re-evaluted as typically
the assumption is that a selector is true or false but doesn't change
its value over time


> One alternative is writing a broker to handle scheduling, which means
> posting all messages intended to be rescheduled to the broker, which would
> post them back when the schedule time occurs, thus handling scheduling in a
> similar manner to how MQ handles subscriptions.

Yeah - I think handling the scheduled publish of messages is probably
a better idea as its more powerful and flexible - and pretty easy to
do via a broker interceptor...

http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/interceptors.html

FWIW here's an open issue on ActiveMQ if you want to track its progress...

http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-451

-- 

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org