Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 588629
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T15:20:19+00:00 2026-05-13T15:20:19+00:00

We currently have an application that uses service broker to queue messages to sent

  • 0

We currently have an application that uses service broker to queue messages to sent to an external system, which we communicate with via a web service interface.

At present we only integrate with a single company, so one queue is sufficient – however we need to start passing messages to multiple companies who all use the same web service interface.

I’m wondering if a single queue system is sufficient for this or should we have a queue per company. With a queue per company I’m worried about scaling this out as we could have lots of queues and then lots of connections to check the queues.

With a single queue however we can just add more readers as required. However, if we cannot communicate with one of the external systems (e.g. connectivity issue), then there isn’t an issue with the message, and we’d want to retry it, but we don’t want to delay messages for companies whose systems are up. I was wondering how people are currently dealing with similar scenarios?

We could reinsert the message, but the concern I have about that is that we don’t guarantee order of delivery.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T15:20:19+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 3:20 pm

    I’m assuming that by “reinserting” a message you mean just rolling back the transaction that received it. The effect will be that the message will become available for receive again, as a first message from the given conversation (so you don’t need to worry about preserving the order of delivery). That said, there is a problem with this approach, namely the poison message handling. If 5 consecutive receives from a given queue are rolled back, the queue will become disabled.

    An alternative approach, described in detail in Klaus Aschenbrenner’s book, is to have a table of pending requests. As soon as the activated procedure receives a request message from Service Broker queue, it tries to do the web service call. If that fails for some reason, the request is put in the pending requests table and retried every once a while (you can use conversation timers to schedule retries). That way, if a web service is not available, it won’t keep blocking the Service Broker reader from servicing other companies (assuming the timeout for the first request is small enough). And since the receive will be committed no matter if the web service call succeeds, you won’t run into poison message problem.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Currently, I have an application that uses Firebird in embedded mode to connect to
I have a web application that can load plugins through reflection. It currently uses
I currently have an MS Access application that connects to a PostgreSQL database via
I currently have a Palm WebOS application that uses an Ajax.Request to connect to
I have an ASP.NET MVC application that currently uses the WebClient class to make
We have an application that uses Lucene.NET within a windows service to reindex our
Background Currently I have a C# Silverlight business application which uses RIA Services. The
I have an ASP.NET MVC 2 application in development that uses a web service
I have an application that uses a service to create an ArrayList of custom
I have a Silverlight / WCF RIA Services application that uses EF 4. Currently,

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.