Supporting fire and forget

Nov 13, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Am really liking SSB, it's seems to be a lot cleaner implementation over NSB. Does SSB support fire'n'forget? It would seem that, by design, all endpoints must have a return address and that all endpoints must be monitoring the return address (IMessagingEndpoint.Start()) before being able to send a message to a destination. Is it possible to send a message without having a return address?

My particular requirement is that I have will a varying amount temporal processes that will just publish messages and will have not be endpoints per se. Is this possible with SSB?

Many thanks,

- Damian
May 14, 2009 at 10:42 AM

Seems this is now a suggestion:

May 16, 2009 at 2:40 AM

Sorry I never responded to this. We have the exact same requirement as you - a process that comes alive for some period of time, sends some messages, then goes to sleep, never needing to receive message asynchronously. This should be a fairly straightforward feature to add, and I'll make the change this weekend. Unfortunately, I have things a little bit torn apart at the moment while I install a REST API for the endpoint monitor service, so I may be a few days from a check in, but I'll have this in place soon.

May 21, 2009 at 4:33 PM

Experimental support has been added for this feature. Simply add "sendOnly=true" attribute to the Endpoint configuration of your one way endpoints, and don't bother to specify a return address. Currently, replying to a message without a return address will throw an exception, so care is needed. Of course, feel free to let me know if that behavior doesn't seem right.