I'm not sure if this is possible or not. If I set a number of messages to be persisted under a topic for some period of time, can I later grab all of them?
I have an MQTT Broker (Mosquitto) set up already for communication between my services but I now also need some storage for several messages, ideally keeping the last 24 hours worth of messages and being able to pull them out later.
Message persistence is only for clients that have subscribed but are currently disconnected and when they do reconnect do so with the cleanSession flag set to false. In which case all the messages published while that client was disconnected.
You can not use a MQTT broker to store an arbitrary number of messages and retrieve them later. If a client is connected then all messages for it's collection of subscribed topics will be delivered as soon as possible.
Of you want to log messages for later you will have to implement this separately, there are plenty of examples of applications that store messages in databases available
Related
I'm using ActiveMQ Artemis 2.18.0 and some Spring Boot clients that communicate with each other via topics. The Spring Boot clients use JMS for all MQTT operations.
I'd like to know if it is possible for a producer with one or more subscribers to find out whether a certain subscriber is actively listening or not. For example, there are 3 clients - SB1, SB2, and SB3. SB1 publishes to test/topic, and SB2 and SB3 are subscribed to test/topic. If SB2 shuts down for any reason would it be possible for SB1 to become aware of this?
I understand that queues would be the way to go for this, but my project is much better suited to the use of topics, and it is set up this way already and works fine. There's just one operation where it must be determined whether the listener is active or not in order to update the listener's online status, a crucial parameter. Right now, clients and the server continually poll a database so that the online status is periodically updated, I want to avoid doing this and use something that Artemis may provide instead.
Apache ActiveMQ Artemis emits notifications to inform listeners of potentially interesting events as consumer created or closed, see Management Notifications at http://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/management.html.
A listener of the management notification address would receive a message for each consumer created or closed, see the Management Notification Example at http://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/latest/examples.html#management-notification
Part of the point to pub/sub based messaging is to decouple the information producer (publisher) from the consumer (subscriber). As a rule a published REALLY shouldn't care if there even are any subscribers.
If you want to know the status of the subscriber then it's up to the subscriber to update this, not the publisher. Things like the Last Will & Testament feature allow the subscriber to update it's status in the event of a failure to explicitly do it when going offline.
In our scenario we have a set of micro services which interact with other services by sending event messages. We anticipate millions of messages per day at the peak. Every message is targeted to one or more listener types.
Our requirements are as follows:
Zero lost messages.
Ability to dynamically register multiple listeners of a specific
type in order to increase throughput.
Listeners are not guaranteed to be alive when messages are
dispatched.
We consider 2 options:
Send each message to JMS main queue then listeners of that queue will route the messages to specific queues according to message content, and then target services will listen to those specific queues.
Send messages to a Kafka topic by message type then target services will subscribe to the relevant topic and consume the messages.
What are the cons and pros for using either JMS or Kafka for that purpose?
Your first requirement is "zero lost messages". However, if you want publish-subscribe semantics (i.e. topics in JMS), but listeners are not guaranteed to be alive when messages are dispatched then JMS is a non-starter as those messages will simply be discarded (i.e. lost).
I would suggest to go with Kafka as it has fault tolerance mechanism and even if some message lost or not captured by any listener you can easily retrieve it from Kafka cluster.
Along with this you can easily add new listener / listener in group and kafka along with zookeeper will take care of managing it very well.
In summary, Kafka is a distributed publish-subscribe messaging system that is designed to be fast, scalable, and durable. Like many publish-subscribe messaging systems, Kafkamaintains feeds of messages in topics. Producers write data to topics and consumers read from topics.
Very easy for integration.
Is there a way for server application that sends topic messages over FCM to find out which topics actually have subscribers?
We have potentially large number of topics and would like to avoid having to always push messages to all of them since only a subset would be active at any given time. I know that server can query about particular InstanceID's subscribed topics, but iterating over thousands of them sounds like a bad idea.
We can roll our own solution, but since that information already exists in Firebase itself, it would be preferred to just get it from there.
No. There is no current way to query the number of subscribers to a topic, you would have to maintain the relationship between token and topics on you app server.
With RabbitMQ, is there a way to "push" messages from a queue TO a consumer as opposed to having a consumer "poll and pull" messages FROM a queue?
This has been the cause of some debate on a current project i'm on. The argument from one side is that having consumers (i.e. a windows service) "poll" a queue until a new message arrives is somewhat inefficient and less desirable than the idea having the message "pushed" automatically from the queue to the subscriber(s)/consumer(s).
I can only seem to find information supporting the idea of consumers "polling and pulling" messages off of a queue (e.g. using a windows service to poll the queue for new messages). There isn't much information on the idea of "pushing" messages to a consumer/subscriber...
Having the server push messages to the client is one of the two ways to get messages to the client, and the preferred way for most applications. This is known as consuming messages via a subscription.
The client is connected. (The AMQP/RabbitMQ/most messaging systems model is that the client is always connected - except for network interruptions, of course.)
You use the client API to arrange that your channel consume messages by supplying a callback method. Then whenever a message is available the server sends it to the client over the channel and the client application gets it via an asynchronous callback (typically one thread per channel). You can set the "prefetch count" on the channel which controls the amount of pipelining your client can do over that channel. (For further parallelism an application can have multiple channels running over one connection, which is a common design that serves various purposes.)
The alternative is for the client to poll for messages one at a time, over the channel, via a get method.
You "push" messages from Producer to Exchange.
https://www.rabbitmq.com/tutorials/tutorial-three-python.html
BTW this is fitting very well IoT scenarios. Devices produce messages and sends them to an exchange. Queue is handling persistence, FIFO and other features, as well as delivery of messages to subscribers.
And, by the way, you never "Poll" the queue. Instead, you always subscribe to publisher. Similar to observer pattern. Generally, I would say genius principle.
So it is similar to post box or post office, except it sends you a notification when message is available.
Quoting from the docs here:
AMQP brokers either deliver messages to consumers subscribed to
queues, or consumers fetch/pull messages from queues on demand.
And from here:
Storing messages in queues is useless unless applications can consume
them. In the AMQP 0-9-1 Model, there are two ways for applications to
do this:
Have messages delivered to them ("push API")
Fetch messages as needed ("pull API")
With the "push API", applications have to indicate interest in
consuming messages from a particular queue. When they do so, we say
that they register a consumer or, simply put, subscribe to a queue. It
is possible to have more than one consumer per queue or to register an
exclusive consumer (excludes all other consumers from the queue while
it is consuming).
Each consumer (subscription) has an identifier called a consumer tag.
It can be used to unsubscribe from messages. Consumer tags are just
strings.
RabbitMQ broker is like server that wont send data to consumer without consumer client getting registering itself to server. but then question comes like below
Can RabbitMQ keep client consumer details and connect to client when packet comes?
Answer is no. so what is alternative well then write plugin by yourself that maintain client information in some kind of config. Plugin will pull from RabbitMQ Queue and push to client.
Please give look at this plugin might help.
https://www.rabbitmq.com/shovel.html
Frankly speaking Client need to implement AMQP protocol to receive so and should listen connection on some port for that. This sound like another server.
Regards,
Vishal
We are using JBOSS 5.1.0, we using topic for storing our messages. And our client is making a durable subscription to get those messages.
Everything is working fine, but one issue is we are getting data from TCP client, we are processing and keeping it in topic, it is sending around 10 messages per second, and our client is reading one message at a time. There is a huge gap between that, and after sometime JBOSS Topic have many messages and it crashes saying out of memory.
IS there any workaround for this.
Basically the producer is producing 10x more messages than consumer can handle. If this situation is stable (not only during peak), this will never work.
If you limit the producer to send only one message per second (which is of course possible, e.g. check out RateLimiter), what will you do with extra messages on the producer side? If they are not queueing up in the topic, they will queue up on the producer side.
You have few choices:
somehow tune your consumer to process messages faster, so the topic is never filled up
tune the topic to use persistent storage. This is much better. Not only the topic won't store everything in memory, but you might also get transactional behaviour (messages are durable)
put a queue of messages that you want to set to the topic and process one message per second. That queue must be persistent and must be able to keep more messages than the topic currently can