"maeste" wrote : "mark.little(a)jboss.com" wrote : We should definitely be storing the entire message. I'd suggest adding some option (maybe on the message) that indicates the duration for which it can be stored and, when it gets deleted by the store, we should have a "grave stone" (marker) for it so that we don't break referential integrity. | | | | Is really it a responsibility you would leave totally in charge to message? | Isn't it a governance responsibility? | It's both. There will be some messages that users will refuse (for legal reasons) to allow to be stored. But until we have hooks for governance ... anonymous wrote : | I would prefer message is responsible to classify itself in a more abstract manner (maybe some properties?), and leave to repository the decision how longer messages have to be stored. | ok anonymous wrote : | DNA could in fact classify messages, on properties base, and (maybe) refine this classification using metadata extracted by sequencer. This way drive to put configuration about repository at a different (higher) tier, where the decision of how long we keep them could depend also on which kind of use we would do of them (of course different kinds of analysis need different store duration). | Of course it's just my humble opinion. We definitely need some way of defining this as a policy across different "types" of messages, users and scenarios. Plus the capability to say "do not store" (I think we may have that already). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4152080#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...