Which use cases make temporary JMS queues a better choice than persistent queues?
Posted
by Stephen Harmon
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Stephen Harmon
Published on 2010-04-26T16:13:10Z
Indexed on
2010/04/26
16:13 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 238
When you are designing a JMS application, which use cases make you pick temporary queues over persistent queues?
We use temporary queues for response messages. We're having some issues maintaining connections to the temp queues, though, so I am testing persistent response queues, instead. One clear disadvantage of persistent queues is that your application has to "know" about them beforehand. If that's not a big deal, though, are there use cases where temp queues are the obvious choice?
© Stack Overflow or respective owner