That's what most providers already do anyways... HornetQ, SunMQ.. etc.. as
I provided with links before. We just don't have a standardized property to
the extra ACK mode
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 6:03 AM, Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com>wrote:
> Clebert,
>
> So are you suggesting that there would be a new ack mode "individual-ack",
> which modifies the behaviour of Message.acknowledge() so that it
> acknowledges the individual message only? (This would require a
> non-transacted session, of course.)
>
> Nigel
>
> On 17/09/2013 22:40, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>
> I don't think it would.. we would add a new ACK MODE...
> INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE
>
> if the new ack mode is used, then you would have a new behaviour defined
> by the new mode. I don't see any problems with that.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:52 PM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I think when we spoke about it, it would cause current API
>> breakage/behavioral changes.
>>
>> Maybe if we add a new method that did the individual ACK we could avoid
>> it?
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Clebert Suconic
>> <clebert.suconic_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Something for next version... (maintenance version or something)
>> >
>> > I feel like I had already talked about this long time ago... sorry if
>> did..
>> >
>> >
>> > I have googled at a few Messaging implementations and I have seen lot of
>> > them supporting individual acks as an extension:
>> >
>> >
>> > http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19909-01/817-3728/program.html
>> >
>> >
>> http://activemq.apache.org/maven/apidocs/org/apache/activemq/ActiveMQSession.html#INDIVIDUAL_ACKNOWLEDGE
>> >
>> >
>> http://docs.jboss.org/hornetq/2.3.0.beta1/docs/user-manual/html/pre-acknowledge.html#individual-ack
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> https://docs.tibco.com/pub/enterprise_message_service/6.3.0-february-2012/doc/html/tib_ems_api_reference/api/dotNET/html/M_TIBCO_EMS_Message_Acknowledge.htm
>> >
>> > WebSphereMQ seems also to have something but I would need to research
>> more.
>> > It's enough to say that it seems it has something there.
>> >
>> > So, Why not make it standard?
>> >
>> >
>> > The behaviour would be.. message.acknowledge would only ack the message
>> > acked and not previous message as it is on the CLIENT_ACK method.
>> >
>> >
>> > WDYT?
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
>
>
--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com