tags:

views:

135

answers:

2

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?

+1  A: 

Does this help ?

http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E13222_01/wls/docs90/jms/design_best_practices.html

paradisonoir
Thanks. That link is a good survey of various design practices, but it doesn't go into a lot of depth about the choice between the different types of queues. I was looking for some real world use cases that have driven other folks' choices.
Stephen Harmon
+2  A: 

Like you said, I use temps for responses. Perms are good if you have a known fixed system because like you said you have to know before hand or using a naming directory.

The real question is, why are you having trouble maintaining connections?

Nick
I suspect the trouble we are having maintaining connections is less "StackOverflow-y" and more "ServerFault-y." I'm working with our sysadmins and Oracle support to see what the problem might be. There are new servers, an upgraded Weblogic instance, and pesky firewall rules in the mix. Using permanent queues where we used to use temps solves the issue, but that's just chewing gum and baling wire. Something's breaking my QueueSessions, but it's probably not programming-related.
Stephen Harmon