Put a custom message on MDB backout queue - queue

I am using MDBs deployed on WAS 61. I have a queue (X) and a backout queue (Y). When the MDB listening on X fails to process the message, and EJB exception is thrown, the transaction rolls back and I put the original message on the backout queue.
backout queue (Y) has its own MDB which picks up the message and sends to support team in email. So far so good.
Now support team would be helped a lot if in addition to the message in the email, they can also see the exception that was thrown by the EJB. Because looking at just the message ,it is not possible to figure out what went wrong. Is there way to add the exception to the original message before putting it in backout queue?

ObjectMessage
:
An ObjectMessage object is used to send a message that contains a
serializable object in the Java programming language ("Java object").
It inherits from the Message interface and adds a body containing a
single reference to an object. Only Serializable Java objects can be
used.
You can create a class implementing Serializable interface & can have proper attributes to hold the exception details. Then by setting this object in ObjectMssage you can put it in queue.
objectMessage.setObject(object); //-- Setting serializable object
At receiver end, this object can be obtained from the message & exception details can be retrieved form it accordingly.

Related

Is there a way to explicitly acknowledge message receipt with QuickFIX/J?

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)

MSMQ poison message means what?

I'm pretty new to this queue service and I don't know what really means poisoned message.
I read that is a message you cant consume, but It means you can Peek() and see the details but not Receive() or what?
From my point of view, I would say a poisoned message is a message on top of the queue that because of its format or even corrupted format is not consumible because the business in charge of handle it can't do it and it maybe generates a exception that in a transactional scenario is catched and handled with a rollback, so the message stays on top forever.
What do you think? Am I totally wrong?
I've had to deal with poison MSMQ messages before, ugh! I'd say your definition is close.
A poison message is basically a message that is repeatedly read from a queue when the service reading the message cannot process the message because of an exception or some other issue and terminates the transaction under which the message is read. In such cases, the message remains in the queue is retried again upon next read from the queue. This can theoretically go on forever if there is a problem with the message.
For example, the message contained data that would violate a database constraint. I sometimes would create an error queue and have the service processing the messages throw the "poison" message into that if an exception occurred during processing. This would at least remove the message from the queue and give me an opportunity to view it later without effecting the main production queues.
Here is some advice and information on poison message handling.

JPA transaction handling between #Stateless and #Asynchronous EJBs

I have a stateless EJB which inserts data into database, sends a response immediately and in the last step calls an asynchronous EJB. Asynchronous EJB can run for long (I mean 5-10 mins which is longer then JPA transaction timeout). The asynchronous ejb needs to read (and work on it) the same record tree (only read) as the one persisted by stateless EJB.
Is seems that the asynchronous bean tries to read the record tree before it was commited or inserted (JPA) by the statelsss EJB so record tree is not visible by async bean.
Stateless EJB:
#Stateless
public class ReceiverBean {
public void receiverOfIncomingRequest(data) {
long id = persistRequest(data);
sendResponseToJmsBasedOnIncomingData(data);
processorAsyncBean.calculate(id);
}
}
}
Asynchronous EJB:
#Stateless
public class ProcessorAsyncBean {
#Asynchronous
public void calculate(id) {
Data data = dao.getById(id); <- DATA IS ALLWAYS NULL HERE!
// the following method going to send
// data to external system via internet (TCP/IP)
Result result = doSomethingForLongWithData(data);
updateData(id, result);
}
#TransactionAttribute(TransactionAttributeType.REQUIRES_NEW)
public void updateData(id, result) {
dao.update(id, result);
}
Maybe I can use a JMS queue to send a signal with ID to the processor bean instead of calling asyc ejb (and message driven bean read data from database) but I want to avoid that if possible.
Another solution can be to pass the whole record tree as a detached JPA object to the processor async EJB instead of reading data back from database.
Can I make async EJB work well in this structure somehow?
-- UPDATE --
I was thinking about using Weblogic JMS. There is another issue here. In case of big load, when there are 100 000 or more data in queue (that will be normal) and there is no internet connection then all of my data in the queue will fail. In case of that exception (or any) appears during sending data via internet (by doSomethingForLongWithData method) the data will be rollbacked to the original queue based on the redelivery-limit and repetitaion settings of Weblogic. This rollback event will generate 100 000 or more threads on Weblogic in the managed server to manage redelivery. That new tons of background processes can kill or at least slow down the server.
I can use IBM MQ as well because we have MQ infrastructure. MQ does not have this kind of affect on Weblogic server but MQ does not have redelivery-limit and delay function. So in case of error (rollback) the message will appear immediately on the MQ again, without delay and I built a hand mill. Thread.sleep() in the catch condition is not a solution in EE application I guess...
Is seems that the asynchronous bean tries to read the record tree before it was commited or inserted (JPA) by the statelsss EJB so record tree is not visible by async bean.
This is expected behavior with bean managed transactions. Your are starting the asynchronous EJB from the EJB with its own transaction context. The asynchronous EJB never uses the callers transaction context (see EJB spec 4.5.3).
As long as you are not using transaction isolation level "read uncommited" with your persistence, you won't see the still not commited data from the caller.
You must think about the case, when the asynch job won't commit (e.g. applicationserver shutdown or abnormal abortion). Is the following calculation and update critical? Is the asynchronous process recoverable if not executed successfully or not even called?
You can think about using bean managed transactions, commiting before calling the asynchronous EJB. Or you can delegate the data update to another EJB with a new transactin context. This will be commited before the call of the asynchronous EJB. This is usally ok for uncritical stuff, missing or failing.
Using persistent and transactional JMS messages along with a dead letter queue has the advantage of a reliable processing of your caclulation and update, even with stopping / starting application server in between or with temporal errors during processing.
You just need to call async method next to the one with transaction markup, so when transaction is committed.
For example, caller of receiverOfIncomingRequest() method, could add
processorAsyncBean.calculate(id);
call next to it.
UPDATE : extended example
CallerMDB
#TransactionAttribute(TransactionAttributeType.NOT_SUPPORTED)
public void onMessage(Message message) {
long id = receiverBean.receiverOfIncomingRequest(data);
processorAsyncBean.calculate(id);
}
ReceiverBean
#TransactionAttribute(TransactionAttributeType.REQUIRED)
public long receiverOfIncomingRequest(data) {
long id = persistRequest(data);
sendResponseToJmsBasedOnIncomingData(data);
return id;
}

Clarification needed with Spring batch concepts

I am new at Spring batch and I am having an issue implementing my business use case with Spring batch.
Basically, I am reading data from a database i.e. a List of subscribers to a newsletter. I then need to send an email to each subscriber as well as to insert data into the database in order to know which subscriber the email was sent to.
I use an ItemProcessor implementation whose process method returns a MimeMessage and takes a subscriber as an argument; the writer associated with this processor is of type: org.springframework.batch.item.mail.javamail.MimeMessageItemWriter.
The issue is that I need another writer for the database inserts (possibly using a CompositeItemWriter) that takes a List of subscribers as an argument and all I have as input is a MimeMessage from the above ItemProcessor.
Can anyone please help?
From what you've said using the ItemProcessor interface to save the message to the database is conceptually not right. You need to use ItemWriter for that. You can implement writing to DB as ItemWriter and sending the mail message as ItemWriter and use CompositeItemWriter to combine them.
Subscriber is passed to these item writers.
The transformation of Subscriber to MimeMessage is done by 2nd writer internally before transferring to MimeMessageItemWriter (which is aggregated by this writer).
Sending the message to subscriber should be done after saving to the DB, as DB can be rolled back if something goes wrong with sending the message (if you need that functionality), and your batch size should be 1 (otherwise rollback will wrongly discard all notifications which have been successfully sent).

Queue name from poison message - MQ / JMS

I'm developing a solution to retrieve poison messages from a backout queue in Websphere 6.1.
My question is: when this msg (ie. TextMessage) is re-queue from a regular queue to backout queue, what is the queue name in msg.getJMSDestination() and msg.getJMSReplyTo()?
For example:
I've got a msg with destination to myQueue. However, for some reason, this msg could not be processed (poison message) and, because websphere is configured for that, this msg is re-queued to backout queue named myBOQueue. If I retrieve this msg from myBOQueue (using MDB), and I execute ((Queue) msg.getJMSDestination()).getQueueName(), what do i go: myQueue or myBOQueue? And if I execute ((Queue) msg.getJMSReplyTo()).getQueueName(), what do I got?
Message document: http://download.oracle.com/javaee/1.4/api/javax/jms/Message.html
Thx,
Andre
You want to look in vendor-specific docs. I think retry counts and poison message queues are a vendor-specific feature not included in the JMS spec.