qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alan Conway <acon...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Best Practice for Transient Sessions?
Date Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:59:19 GMT
Justin Ross wrote:
> Hi, Josh. 
> 
> Do you have some kind of user session id you could use to create session-scoped queues?
With a queue per active user, the world would remain coherent without the need to create and
destroy things too much. 
> 

Josh - if you create sessions without explcitly giving them a name, qpid will generate a UUID
as the name.
You can get it with session.getId().getName()

Of course if you have your own unique session identifier you can use that instead.

> Justin 
> 
> -------- Original Message -------- 
> Subject: 	Best Practice for Transient Sessions? 
> Date: 	Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:05:00 -0500 (EST) 
> From: 	Joshua Kramer <josh@globalherald.net> 
> Reply-To: 	users@qpid.apache.org 
> To: 	users@qpid.apache.org 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Is there a best practice for handling transient sessions - where server 
> and local queues are created, publish and consume one message, then 
> destroyed?
> 
> I'm thinking of a case where I service web pages.  If I keep the same 
> queues alive between transactions, then it is concievable that one persons 
> web page could display data from the previous transaction - if that 
> transaction is canceled before it receives a response, then the subsequent 
> transaction will receive an invalid response.  If I key the transactions, 
> I can reject invalid transactions.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> I'm looking into the capabilities of my web framework (Django) to handle 
> persistent objects.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Josh
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:users-subscribe@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message