I am reading byte array content from event hub using consumer and I have a junk value followed by count of items(byte arrays) and then the byte array fetched .
Eg value [-95 , 4 , 50,48,50,48]
I want this junk -95 to be removed , is it kafka issue or event hub issue.
If so how to resolve it kindly need help
Your consumers receive whatever is sent to Event Hubs. Event Hubs never changes the payload in an EventData and relays it as is. Thus, if you are seeing some content which looks like changed from the consumer's perspective, I strongly recommend you to check the senders and make sure they send correct payload.
Related
For a guaranteed message receiver, in an ACK-based protocol like Apache Kafka, TIBCO EMS/RVCM, IBM MQ and JMS there is a way to explicitly acknowledge the receipt of a message. Explicit Acks are not just automatically sent when you return from a dispatcher's callback but an extra method on the session or message to say "I've processed this message". The reason for the existence of this explicit ack is that you can safely queue received messages to be processed by another thread at a later time and then only call this explicit-ack method once your are really done processing this message (safely storing to DB, forwarding to another MOM, etc.) Having this explicit method ensures that you are not losing messages even when you crash after receiving messages but didn't process them yet.
Now with QuickFIX/J (of FIX in general) I know it's not ACK-based but instead persists the last received SeqNum in a file and instead of sendings Acks, message guarantee is achieved by sending ResendRequests for missed SeqNums. But still, is there a way to tell the QuickFIX/J API "I don't automatically want you to persist this last SeqNum once I exit this onMessage() callback but hold off until I tell you so". In other words is there a Session variation which doesn't persist SeqNums automatically and then I can call something on the FIX message to persist this last Seqnum once I've really processed/saved that message ?
(If this feature doesn't exist I think it would be a good addition to the API)
How can I get copy of all messages (or references of all messages) that are on a VMQueue?
I want to loop through the list of messages that are currently on VMQueue, check the payload of every message, and based on that make decision about next step in the flow.
Thanks.
You have to consume them with a vm:inbound-endpoint, you can't peek or browse them without actually taking them out of the queue.
JMS mesages are sometimes moving to the DLQ without throwing any exception.
Jboss server instance used is 4.3.0.GA_CP04_EAP.
We are using an an MDB that listens for incoming messages on a queue A, when it receives any message it updates the database and sens an email in one transaction.Transaction is CMT.
Now, what is happening is, sometimes mesages are not picked up by the consumer and they end up in the DLQ. Though from the JMX- console message count i could see that the message once did arrive to the queue A but then goes to the DLQ.
This happens intermittently and does not throw any exceptions on the logs either .
What seems to work most of the times is restarting the servers. No idea about what happens behind the scenes though.
**And after 29 days, same problem has returned.
This follows a pattern but varies with every restart.
There are 2 clustered serevrs which also do loadbalancing , P1 and P2.
First two email messages go to and processed by P1-Email sent
Next email message resquest goes to P2-Email sent
Next two email messages go to and processed by P1-Email sent
Next email message resquest goes to P2-Email NOT SENT
and the cycle repeats
I have found a workaround to this nagging problem thanks to the helpful info found at http://leakfromjavaheap.blogspot.in/2013/05/when-dead-letter-queue-becomes-zombie.html
DLQ listener is set up to listen for any incoming messages and puts them back to their intended destination if any of them is found on DLQ.
Also, considering the situation where any message is travelling from DLQ to the Queue and back to the DLQ in endless loops, a counter is set to check how many times the message has been to the DLQ before, if it exceeds the limit, then it is put to a Permanent DLQ (DLQ for a DLQ).
Application has been running smoothly ever since.
If you can provide the log details when message goes to DLQ, would be better to dig into this issue.
The logs did not contain any useful info; not even an exception to give a hint.
Finally,changed the local tx data source to xa data source and it was a success.Still wondering if there is a reason behind it.
I have read about the true messaging and that instead of sending payload on the bus, it sends an identifier. In our case, we have a lot of legacy apps/services and those were designed to receive the payload of messages (xml) that is close to 4MB (close MSMQ limit). Is there a way for nService bus to handle large payload and persist messages automatically or another work-around, so that the publisher/subscriber services don't have to worry neither about the payload size, nor about how to de/re-hydrate the payload?
Thank you in advance.
You could use the Message Sequence pattern. In NServiceBus, you would split the payload in the sender, wrap the chunks in a custom 'Sequence' IMessage, and then implement a saga at the other end to extract the chunks & reassemble. You would need to put some effort into error handling & timeouts.
You can always use the quick "fix" of compressing the messages.
A POCO serialized with the binary serializer can be compressed down by a large margin. We saw our messages that were 20mb compressed down to 3.1mb.
So if your messages are hovering around 4mb it might be simple to just write an IMessageSerializer that automatically compresses the message while it is on the wire.
I'm not aware of any internal NServiceBus capability to associate extra data with a message out of band.
I think you're right on the mark - if the entire payload can't fit within the limit, then it's better to persist it elsewhere on your own and then passing an ID.
However, it may be possible for you to design a message structure such that a message could implement an IHasPayload interface (which would perhaps incorporate an ID and a Type?), and then your application logic could have a common method for getting the payload given an IHasPayload message.
I am using activemq to pass requests between different processes. In some cases, I have multiple, duplicate message (which are requests) in the queue. I would like to have only one. Is there a way to send a message in a way that it will replace an older message with similar attributes? If there isn't, is there a way to inspect the queue and check for a message with specific attributes (in this case I will not send the new message if an older one exists).
Clarrification (based on Dave's answer): I am actually trying to make sure that there aren't any duplicate messages on the queue to reduce the amount of processing that is happening whenever the consumer gets the message. Hence I would like either to replace a message or not even put it on the queue.
Thanks.
This sounds like an ideal use case for the Idempotent Consumer which removes duplicates from a queue or topic.
The following example shows how to do this with Apache Camel which is the easiest way to implement any of the Enterprise Integration Patterns, particularly if you are using ActiveMQ which comes with Camel integrated out of the box
from("activemq:queueA").
idempotentConsumer(memoryMessageIdRepository(200)).
header("myHeader").
to("activemq:queueB");
The only trick to this is making sure there's an easy way to calculate a unique ID expression on each message - such as pulling out an XPath from the document or using as in the above example some unique message header
You could browse the queue and use selectors to identify the message. However, unless you have a small amount of messages this won't scale very well. Instead, you message should just be a pointer to a database-record (or set of records). That way you can update the record and whoever gets the message will then access the latest version of the record.