Comment 1 for bug 1905965

John Eckersberg (jeckersb) wrote :

I think there is some conflation of terminology here.

RabbitMQ *does* have the "direct reply-to" feature described here:

However, in the oslo.messaging rabbitmq driver, the references to "direct" is not referring to the same thing. Instead, it's simply differentiating the "direct" exchange type from the others, "fanout" and "topic" ("headers" is unused):

As far as I can tell, within the intended RPC architecture, the mandatory flag is working as intended here. There is no special reply-to shortcut being used. The RPC sender (should) declare the reply_XXX queue/binding/exchange triplet that the RPC server uses to return the reply. However if the server can't send the reply back for some reason (error somewhere in that exchange->binding->queue flow) then we *do* want to raise the error, otherwise we would blackhole the msg and the sender would never know it was lost.

I've seen this same/similar behavior in the past but I've never been able to reproduce it successfully. See for example from 3+ years ago:

Something happens to break the normal exchange->binding->queue flow. I'm not sure if this is something internal to RabbitMQ where object(s) get lost/corrupted during failover? Or perhaps this is a bug in oslo.messaging/kombu/pyamqp wherein the necessary objects are not properly redeclared on reconnection.