Hello I have a problem about setting connection timeout.
I use WebServiceTemplate and it has 1 messageSender (CommonsHttpMessageSender).
But is it possible to set different connection timeouts for each URIs(endpoints)?
Sincerely...
public Message sendRequest(OutgoingRequest message, MessageHeaders headers,
EndpointInfoProvider endpointInfoProvider,
WebServiceMessageCallback requestCallback){
Assert.notNull(endpointInfoProvider, "Destination provider is required!");
final Credentials credentials = endpointInfoProvider.getCredentials();
URI destinationUri = endpointInfoProvider.getDestination();
for (WebServiceMessageSender messageSender : webServiceTemplate.getMessageSenders()) {
if (messageSender instanceof CommonsHttpMessageSender) {
HttpClient httpClient = ((CommonsHttpMessageSender) messageSender).getHttpClient();
httpClient.getState().setCredentials(
new AuthScope(destinationUri.getHost(),
destinationUri.getPort(), AuthScope.ANY_REALM,
AuthScope.ANY_SCHEME), credentials
);
httpClient.getParams().setAuthenticationPreemptive(true);
((CommonsHttpMessageSender) messageSender)
.setConnectionTimeout(endpointInfoProvider
.getTimeOutDuration());
}
}
webServiceTemplate.setDestinationProvider(endpointInfoProvider);
//........
}
Spring WS doesn't support different timeouts for different URIs and doesn't plan to add such functionality. Given that your question involves WebServiceTemplate, you can easily configure multiple templates with different timeouts, and use them as desired.
Related
I'm using vertx-4.2.6 to build a proxy service which takes requests from clients (for ex: browser, standalone apps etc), invoke a single thirdparty server, gets the response and send the same response back to client who initiated the request.
In this process, I'm using shared Webclient across multiple requests, i'm getting response from thirdparty quickly (mostly in milli seconds) but sometimes the response is not returned back to client and stucks at ctx.end(response).
Whenever i restart my proxy server, it serves requests sometimes without any issues but time goes on, lets say by EOD, for new requests client seeing 503 error -service unavailable I'm using one MainVerticle with 10 instances. I'm not using any worker threads.
Below is the pseudo code:
MainVerticle
DeploymentOptions depOptions = new DeploymentOptions();
depOptions.setConfig(config);
depOptions.setInstances(10);
vertx.deployVerticle(MainVerticle.class.getName(), depOptions);
.....
router.route("/api/v1/*")
.handler(new HttpRequestHandler(vertx));
HttpRequestHandler
public class HttpRequestHandler implements Handler<RoutingContext> {
private final Logger LOGGER = LogManager.getLogger( HttpRequestHandler.class );
private WebClient webClient;
public HttpRequestHandler(Vertx vertx) {
super(vertx);
this.webClient=createWebClient(vertx);
}
private WebClient createWebClient(Vertx vertx) {
WebClientOptions options=new WebClientOptions();
options.setConnectTimeout(30000);
WebClient webClient = WebClient.create(vertx,options);
return webClient;
}
#Override
public void handle(RoutingContext ctx) {
ctx.request().bodyHandler(bh -> {
ctx.request().headers().remove("Host");
StopWatch sw=StopWatch.createStarted();
LOGGER.info("invoking CL end point with the given request details...");
/*
* Invoking actual target
*/
webClient.request(ctx.request().method(),target_port,target_host, "someURL")
.timeout(5000)
.sendBuffer(bh)
.onSuccess(clResponse -> {
LOGGER.info("CL response statuscode: {}, headers: {}",clResponse.statusCode(),clResponse.headers());
LOGGER.trace("response body from CL: {}",clResponse.body());
sw.stop();
LOGGER.info("Timetaken: {}ms",sw.getTime()); //prints in milliseconds
LOGGER.info("sending response back to client...."); //stuck here
/*
* prepare the final response and return to client..
*/
ctx.response().setStatusCode(clResponse.statusCode());
ctx.response().headers().addAll(clResponse.headers());
if(clResponse.body()!=null) {
ctx.response().end(clResponse.body());
}else {
ctx.response().end();
}
LOGGER.info("response SENT back to client...!!"); //not getting this log for certain requests and gives 503 - service unavailable to clients after 5 seconds..
}).onFailure(err -> {
LOGGER.error("Failed while invoking CL server:",err);
sw.stop();
if(err.getCause() instanceof java.net.ConnectException) {
connectionRefused(ctx);
}else {
invalidResponse(ctx);
}
});
});
Im suspecting issue might be due to shared webclient. But i'm not sure. I'm new to Vertx and i'm not getting any clue what's going wrong. Please suggest if there are any options to be set on WebClientOptions to avoid this issue.
I'm following Vert.x 4's SockJS documentation and noticed that each SockJSSocket inside my handler has a .webSession() and a .webUser(). However, both these fields are empty aside from the .webSession().id()
I have an AuthHandler registered on the sub-router that this socket handler is on, but the SockJS Client in my frontend is not capable of sending credentials in the HTTP upgrade request.
How am I supposed to populate these fields for use?
I'm using the following straight-forward code to keep the session-like information available:
class SockJSBridge implements Handler<BridgeEvent> {
#Override
void handle( BridgeEvent event ) {
SockJSSocket socket = event.socket()
MultiMap headers = socket.headers()
switch( event.type() ){
case REGISTER:
def user = getUserFromJWTHeader event.rawMessage.headers.authorization
headers.add 'userId', user.id
break
case SEND:
String userId = headers.get 'userId'
socket.write new JsonObject( address:userId, body:event.rawMessage?.body ).toBuffer()
break
}
}
}
I'm doing a performance test against a Spring Cloud application. When number of concurrent users exceeds 150, it starts to give "Forwarding error"
{"timestamp":1458685370986,"status":500,"error":"Internal Server Error","exception":"com.netflix.zuul.exception.ZuulException","message":"Forwarding error"}
Which parameter I should adjust to get rid of the error?
You should post your logs for the error, without that we can only guess what the exact error is. As Forwarding error reported by ZuulExcetption is a generic error.
See this link for the RibbonRoutingFilter.forward() method which actually reports this error. I'm adding the code here for the backup.
private HttpResponse forward(RestClient restClient, String service, Verb verb, String uri, Boolean retryable,
MultiValueMap<String, String> headers, MultiValueMap<String, String> params,
InputStream requestEntity) throws Exception {
Map<String, Object> info = this.helper.debug(verb.verb(), uri, headers, params,
requestEntity);
RibbonCommand command = new RibbonCommand(service, restClient, verb, uri, retryable,
headers, params, requestEntity);
try {
HttpResponse response = command.execute();
this.helper.appendDebug(info, response.getStatus(),
revertHeaders(response.getHeaders()));
return response;
}
catch (HystrixRuntimeException ex) {
info.put("status", "500");
if (ex.getFallbackException() != null
&& ex.getFallbackException().getCause() != null
&& ex.getFallbackException().getCause() instanceof ClientException) {
ClientException cause = (ClientException) ex.getFallbackException()
.getCause();
throw new ZuulException(cause, "Forwarding error", 500, cause
.getErrorType().toString());
}
throw new ZuulException(ex, "Forwarding error", 500, ex.getFailureType()
.toString());
}
}
As you can see that only viable place where the error can be generated is in command.execute(), where command is an instance of HystrixCommand. Here is a link for the execute() method in HystrixCommand.
Below is the code for backup.
public R execute() {
try {
return queue().get();
} catch (Exception e) {
throw decomposeException(e);
}
}
Here the queue() is a Future instance
Most common error that can occur with the Future is a timeout exception. Since here Future instance queue() is not bound by any timetout value, it can go on waiting for ever.
However most of the time API which make use of Future have a thread monitoring the time they take and they interrupt it after a certain period of time. Same is done by Ribbon.
If yours indeed is a timeout issue then an easy solution is to increase Ribbon timeout value by using following property.
ribbon.ReadTimeout=10000
//or
<client-name>.ribbon.ReadTimeout=10000
Time out majorly can occur if the tomcat server which hosts the service which is proxied by the Zuul has too much load. It's whole thread pool is exhausted thus resulting in the next requests having to wait for long time.
This can probably be alleviated by change the number of threads that your service tomcat has by using following property.
server.tomcat.max-threads=0
By default it's set to 0, which leaves it to the embedded server's default. In tomcat's case it's 200. See the reference maxThreads property in tomcat.
Note: To increase the thread pool size we have to make sure that the machine has that capacity to provide resources if that many threads were to be in execution simultaneously.
//StockPriceEmitter is a "dead loop" thread which generate data, and invoke StockPriceService.onUpdates() to send data.
#Service
public class StockPriceService implements StockPriceEmitter.Listener
{
#Inject
private BayeuxServer bayeuxServer;
#Session
private LocalSession sender;
public void onUpdates(List<StockPriceEmitter.Update> updates)
{
for (StockPriceEmitter.Update update : updates)
{
// Create the channel name using the stock symbol
String channelName = "/stock/" + update.getSymbol().toLowerCase(Locale.ENGLISH);
// Initialize the channel, making it persistent and lazy
bayeuxServer.createIfAbsent(channelName, new ConfigurableServerChannel.Initializer()
{
public void configureChannel(ConfigurableServerChannel channel)
{
channel.setPersistent(true);
channel.setLazy(true);
}
});
// Convert the Update business object to a CometD-friendly format
Map<String, Object> data = new HashMap<String, Object>(4);
data.put("symbol", update.getSymbol());
data.put("oldValue", update.getOldValue());
data.put("newValue", update.getNewValue());
// Publish to all subscribers
ServerChannel channel = bayeuxServer.getChannel(channelName);
channel.publish(sender, data, null); // this code works fine
//this.sender.getServerSession().deliver(sender, channel.getId(), data, null); // this code does not work
}
}
}
this line channel.publish(sender, data, null); // this code works fine works fine, now I don't want channel to publish message to all clients subscirbed with it, I want to send to a specific client, so I write this this.sender.getServerSession().deliver(sender, channel.getId(), data, null);, but it does not work, browser can't get message.
thx in advance.
I strongly recommend that you spend some time reading the CometD concepts page, in particular the section about sessions.
Your code does not work because you are sending the message to the sender, not to the recipient.
You need to pick which remote ServerSession you want to send the message to among the many that may be connected to your server, and call serverSession.deliver(...) on that remote ServerSession.
How to pick the remote ServerSession depends on your application.
For example:
for (ServerSession session : bayeuxServer.getSessions())
{
if (isAdminUser(session))
session.deliver(sender, channel.getId(), data, null);
}
You have to provide an implementation of isAdmin(ServerSession) with your logic, of course.
Note that you don't need to iterate over the sessions: if you happen to know the session id to deliver to, you can do:
bayeuxServer.getSession(sessionId).deliver(sender, channel.getId(), data, null);
Also refer to the CometD chat demo shipped with the CometD distribution, that contain a full fledged example of how to send a message to particular session.
Hi i have got a TCP/IP Socket project.
i can send string messages to Server with Client side and i can get responses from server.
But getting one string message and sending only one string (or any other object).I wanna Encode Personel class to Byte array after send to Clients from server side.And Decode it. than get values from my class.
//SERVER SIDE CODE Connect() starts at on form load
private void Connect()
{
// start listen socket
dinleyiciSoket = new TcpListener(System.Net.IPAddress.Any, 10048);
dinleyiciSoket.Start();
Socket istemciSoketi = dinleyiciSoket.AcceptSocket();
NetworkStream agAkisi = new NetworkStream(istemciSoketi);
BinaryReader binaryOkuyucu = new BinaryReader(agAkisi);
BinaryWriter binaryYazici = new BinaryWriter(agAkisi);
string alinanMetin = binaryOkuyucu.ReadString();
MessageBox.Show(alinanMetin, "Yeni Genelge", MessageBoxButtons.OK);
binaryYazici.Write(true);
dinleyiciSoket.Stop();
Connect();
}
////////// CLIENT SIDE //////////////
private string IpAdresi(string host)
{
string address = "";
IPAddress[] addresslist = Dns.GetHostAddresses(host);
foreach (IPAddress theaddress in addresslist)
{
if (theaddress.AddressFamily == AddressFamily.InterNetwork)
{
address = theaddress.ToString();
}
}
return address;
}
bool onay;
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//create socket connection
Socket istemciBaglantisi = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Stream, ProtocolType.Tcp);
//Bağlantıyı gerçekleştir
if (istemciBaglantisi.Connected != true)
{
istemciBaglantisi.Connect(IPAddress.Parse(IpAdresi(txtHost.Text)), 10048);
}
agAkisi = new NetworkStream(istemciBaglantisi);
binaryYazici = new BinaryWriter(agAkisi);
binaryOkuyucu = new BinaryReader(agAkisi);
binaryYazici.Write(txtMesaj.Text);
onay = binaryOkuyucu.ReadBoolean();
MessageBox.Show(onay.ToString());
istemciBaglantisi.Close();
}
Take a look at object serialization. See here for examples. That should get you going in the right direction.
You can use google's protocol buffers. It is a fast and compact mechanism for serializing objects. There are two implementations on .NET: protobuf-net and protobuf.
I'd use object serialization or XmlSerialization, both available in .NET. I would not look at Google's protocol buffers, because that RPC encoding has little advantage over what's already in .NET, but it is obscure, especially in the .NET world, and especially now. I wouldn't bet on it becoming mainstream for .net devs. As a result, you will only make your code harder to maintain by using this RPC encoding.
I don't really see the need for protobufs when the apps that are interconnecting are homogeneous, and are NOT on the scale of Google's datacenters. I also don't see the need even when heterogeneity is the rule, because we already have JSON and XML. They are both readable and serviceable, where protobufs are not.
In any case .NET has what you need for this, built-in.