jsr343-experts@jms-spec.java.net

[jsr343-experts] Re: [jms-spec users] Re: JMS Support for DI

From: Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:23:00 -0600

Nigel,

I agree this is a good proposal... please ignore my previous email on
RequestResponse.

Regarding the receiveSyncMessage on Connection

- Would you still be able to create a Consumer and do a receive(timeout) or
receiveImmediate() on the Consumer?
- If that's the only way to do receive a message blocked (sync), then I see
an issue on performance / caching

- Also: Maybe I misunderstood what you said about marking the intention for
next messages, but assuming first a read to assume the connection would
cache messages would IMO be too much of a inference on what the user will
do next.

Regarding the Producer
- I like the idea of not having a MessageProducer at all (any flow control
needed on the implementation can be encapsulated here).

Even on the Consumer case, you could probably do:
consumer.getConnection().send(queue, message);