I recently had to rollback from WF13 to WF11 due to a regression in one of the dependencies.
Now I am trying to get the AMQP protocol to work on WildFly 11's messaging system. I am running a high availability setup with two nodes. Each of the node has a message consumer locally. This message consumer connects through AMQP1. I've added io.netty as a dependency to the org/apache/activemq/artemis/protocol/amqp module and updated org/apache/qpid to get the AMQP protocol to work (see also WFLY-7823). Now my AMQP message consumer works fine, but it seems to receive messages always exactly twice, and it appears to be even in the same frame. This happens on the same node (the other node receives messages through the bridge if the message isn't handled locally in the first place). So on one node and one queue consumer, I receive every message exactly twice, at the very same instant, before I even got to send an ACK/NACK for the first message I received.
I don't remember seeing this issue on WildFly 13.
Are there any known regressions regarding how messages are sent through the remote connectors? Perhaps an issue in the AMQP protocol? Or could it be a compatibility issue with the updated version of qtip?
For what it's worth Wildfly only uses ActiveMQ Artemis to fulfill their need for a JMS implementation (i.e. a traditional part of Java EE). I don't believe Wildfly has any real interest in other protocols or APIs aside from JMS.
My understanding here is that if you need to support multi-protocol message use-cases you should likely be using a standalone broker. I believe this is why none of the other protocols which Artemis supports (e.g. AMQP, STOMP, MQTT, OpenWire) are enabled in Wildfly or have documentation on how to enable them (aside from the occasional forum post).
It's also worth noting that Wildfly 11 has Artemis 1.5.5 in it which is 10 releases or so behind the latest version (i.e. 2.6.2). Much work has been done on the AMQP implementation in those releases so I think you're best served by using a standalone version of Artemis rather than Artemis embedded in Wildfly.
Related
I wonder if it is possible to configure message redelivery on the client side. I have read the ActiveMQ Artemis docs and have not found any information about this feature. So I made a conclusion that there is no opportunity to configure message redelivery on the client side. The only place to configure message redelivery is the broker.xml file. Am I right about it?
By the way I can configure the connection to ActiveMQ Artemis by using broker URL params or by application.yml since I using Spring Boot 2.x.
ActiveMQ Artemis supports AMQP, STOMP, MQTT, OpenWire, etc. Many clients exist for these protocols written in lots of different languages across all kinds of platforms. Whether or not a given client supports client-side redelivery is really up to the client itself. You don't specify which client you're using so it's impossible to give you a specific yes/no answer.
However, I can say that ActiveMQ Artemis ships a JMS client implementation which uses the core protocol. That client does not support client-side redelivery. However, the OpenWire JMS client shipped with ActiveMQ "Classic" does support client-side redelivery, and it can be used with ActiveMQ Artemis as well.
This question already has answers here:
Difference Between Apache Kafka and Camel (Broker vs Integration)
(4 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
As far as I know, Apache Kafka is asynchronous messaging platform, where as Apache Camel is a platform implementing the enterprise integration patterns.
So, what are the practical differences of Apache Camel and Apache Kafka? We planned to implement the system with Apache Camel, which is relatively easy, but our customer wanted the Apache Kafka instead without rational.
What would be the advantages of choosing Apache Kafka to implement a message queue functionality, which could be implemented with Apache Camel as well? I'm concerned Kafka would just introduce unnecessary overhead to project. Are we comparing apples and oranges?
What we need is straightforward API's to setup and use clustered message queues. Our initial plan was to use Camel to consume/produce on clustered JMS or ActiveMQ queues. How would Kafka make this task easier? The application itself would run on WebLogic server on either case.
The messaging would be point-to-point type, where there are multiple instances of same service running, but only one instance should process the message and emit the result according to load balancing policy. Message queues are also clustered, so neither failure of service instance or queue instance is SPOF.
Camel and Kafka are totally different things. In many use cases, camel is just used as a client of kafka/activemq/... .
Kafka and activemq are similar, but also different things, refer What is the difference between Apache kafka vs ActiveMQ. Kafka has higher throughput, and data always on disk, so a little more reliable than activemq.
Kafka is usually used as real-time data streaming, and in general activemq is mainly used for integration between applications, the book says so. But in most real world cases ,kafka and activemq can replace each other easily.
It is very hard to compare those two. They are not covering the same areas of work, but exist some systems, where you can replace one by the other.
So very shortly.
Kafka is messaging platform with streaming ability to process messages Apache Kafka.
Camel is ETL framework it can transform messages/events/data from "any" (see endpoint list by Camel) input point and send it to "any" output Apache Camel - Enterprise Integration Patterns.
You may use Camel without Kafka at all, and vice versa. But there are of course possibilities to use succesfully both together.
Case 1. You process mail and store in PostgreSQL DB. Kafka is useless
here.
Case 2. You process messages from ActiveMQ and send them to
Kafka. You may use both.
I am new to Jboss fuse karaf(jboss-fuse-6.3) and activeMQ.
Currently I am accessing activeMq on localhost:61616, my question is what is more suitable way of using activeMQ - on same server(localhost:port) or can I use activeMQ hosted on remote server, which method is more fast and safe ?
Thanks.
If you are using it for dev purpose, then the most suitable way is to use the embedded one that comes with Fuse out of the box because it requires less maintenance.
However if you are asking about AMQ in production environment then most likely it should be highly available and able to survive crashes without data losses. In this case you need to think about some failover machanism, so the safer option is to use an external ActiveMQ broker or even better - a cluster of AMQ brokers. In this case the speed of message delivery and consumption depends on the network connectivity as well.
Also if we talk about speed you should consider where AMQ should store it's messages especially the undelivered ones. By default it comes with a file based DB KahaDB which can be changed. In both cases it's fast enough.
Wish you luck with the ESB!
I'd like to host apps that uses queue to communicate with each other on OpenShift.
One kind of apps - producers will put some data to the queue and another type - consumer will process the message. My question is how to implement message queue. I've thought about two approaches:
Create an app with JBoss, HornetQ and consumer and create proxy port for HornetQ, so that producers can send messages there.
Create an app with JBoss and consumer, and make a JBoss's HornetQ available to producers. It sounds a bit better for me, but I don't know if I can make queue available to producers and how it works if there are more instances of consumer on different nodes (and different JBoss instances).
I'm not sure how else to answer you besides showing you a link on how to use Wildfly. You can just use the Wildfly Cartridge:
https://www.openshift.com/quickstarts/wildfly-8
If you provide me some extra context I can try to enrich the answer a bit better. I need to know what is your problem, and what's not working.
If you just want to know how to configure Wildfly with HornetQ, the Wildfly cartridge I posted is the way to go.
We have a server app that is deployed across to server machines, each running JBOSS 4.2.2. We use JBOSS messaging with MDBs to communicate between the systems. Currently we need to start the servers in a very specific order so that JBOSS can connect properly. If a server starts and doesn't see its resources it never tries again. This is problematic and time consuming in testing when we're bouncing servers constantly. We believe that if we could specify a retry flag in JBOSS could reattempt to get the connection.
Is there a flag/config option in JBOSS that would reattempt to obtain JMS connections on failure at startup?
I am quite new to the JMS technology, so it is entirely possible that I have mixed up some terms here. Since this capability is to be used in house experimental or deprecated options are acceptable.
Edit: The problem is that a consumer starts up with no producer available and subsequently fails, never to try again. If a consumer and producer are up and the producer dies the consumer will retry for the producer to come back.
I'm 95% sure that JBoss MDBs do retry connections like that. If your MDBs are not receiving messages as you expect, I think something else is wrong. Do the MDBs depend on any other resources. Perhaps posting your EJB descriptors (META-IF/ejb-jar.xml and META-IF/jboss.xml) would help.