[Rhemrg-users-list] RE: [Rhm-users] how many queues can I have?

[Alan Conway]

On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 11:51 -0500, Andrew M wrote:
> I'm not sure if I understand.  Let's say I have producers A and B sending
> orders.  A doesn't need to (and shouldn't) see B's executions returned from
> the exchange and B shouldn't see A's.  Some other application may need to
> see both A's and B's.  wuddyathink?
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrew
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rhm-users-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:rhm-users-bounces at redhat.com] On
> Behalf Of Bill Whiting
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 8:46 PM
> To: rhm-users at redhat.com
> Cc: rhemrg-users-list at redhat.com; rhm-users at redhat.com
> Subject: Re: [Rhm-users] how many queues can I have?
> 
> Unless the replies are being read by separate processes, then send all 
> of the replies back to a single queue. It's much more efficient, and 
> there's no benefit in that case to separating the reply messages.
> 
> //Bill
> 
> Andrew M wrote:
> >
> > Well let's say I have various producers sending stock orders before 
> > the open of trading. When the market opens those orders are filled or 
> > cancelled and execution reports come back. I want to make sure those 
> > executions get to the app who produced the order. Before the open I 
> > may have several hundred thousand orders pending. Is there a better 
> > way to go where I don't use an individual temp queue for each order's 
> > reply?

To generalize on Bills suggestion: create a queue per producer process
rather than per order. Each producer process subscribes to its own
execution report temp queue and matches up the reports to the original
orders. Each producer sees only the reports for orders that it issued
itself.