On 07/20/2012 12:20 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 07/20/2012 05:12 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>> So the thoughts are to have large message support via grouping which
>> would also then need large queue support. I.e. design better larger
>> queue support and have large message support via grouping be a
>
On 07/20/2012 05:12 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
So the thoughts are to have large message support via grouping which
would also then need large queue support. I.e. design better larger
queue support and have large message support via grouping be a
derivative of that case?
Yes that's my view (group
On 07/20/2012 05:52 AM, Gordon Sim wrote:
>
> Large message support (distinct from large queue support, which is
> what flow-to-disk currently attempts to address) is not currently
> supported anyway; the maximum size of message is limited by the
> available memory.
>
I know
> I think some form o
On 07/20/2012 08:43 AM, Toralf Lund wrote:
On 18/07/12 23:38, Alan Conway wrote:
At present there's no way to have a
single thread handle all the traffic on a connection, or to have single
global thread handling all the Qpid traffic. (Those are both interesting
avenues to develop)
You mean, b
On 07/20/2012 10:22 AM, Jakub Scholz wrote:
While I agree with you that the flow-to-disk queues have a lot of
problems, I do not think they are totally useless. If you remove them
without any real alternative, you may block the upgrade path for many
people using them. At least speaking for my sel
On 07/19/2012 09:27 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
features to drop are:
(i) legacy lvq modes; lvq support would still remain, only the two old
and peculiar modes would go; I really doubt anyone actually depends on
these anyway, they were more a limitation than a feature
+1
(ii) asynchronous q
Hi Gordon,
While I agree with you that the flow-to-disk queues have a lot of
problems, I do not think they are totally useless. If you remove them
without any real alternative, you may block the upgrade path for many
people using them. At least speaking for my self, it probably would be
a problem
On 18/07/12 23:38, Alan Conway wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 09:28 +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
Hi
Does anyone here receive "published" messages in an application using a
something like a GLib main loop? Or Gtk or Qt? If you do, how exactly do
you integrate the message availability check with the m
