I need a solution where I can set a minimum delay between the messages that are polled out of the Queue. I do not want to delay every message by a fixed amount of miliseconds.
Lets say the Queue get 3 messages in the first second. But I want to pull every 5 seconds. So my Client does not get overloaded with to many request.
Is there a way to solve this with rabbitmq or do i have to change to some other framework?
Any time you ask for assistance about RabbitMQ (or any software), you must provide information about what versions of software you are using, and what client libraries. That way the people who are assisting you can do so effectively.
Your client should consume from the queue using the basic.consume method. Set the channel's "prefetch" value to the maximum number of unacknowledged messages you wish for that consumer to receive at once (you can set it to 1 if you only want one message at a time). Then, do your work and only acknowledge the messages after the desired amount of time has elapsed.
Be certain that this does not result in messages accumulating in queues. You will monitor your RabbitMQ installation, right?
NOTE: the RabbitMQ team monitors the rabbitmq-users mailing list and only sometimes answers questions on StackOverflow.
Related
After reading documentation about what is Rabbit and what does, I have some common questions:
Case is: Producer sends one message to some consumers (subscribers).
I need a short explanation for all points of list below, what to use, and what to dig further.
How to clear queue and stop sending message to consumers after
specific time/date?
Can I include to confirmed message user's data like JSON?
Where is stored this data? In the same queue?
How to filter confirmed messages and then clear queue?
How to clear queue after specific time/date?
What happens if not one consumer no confirms message, how long they are stored?
Does consumer subscribe on queue or can subscribe on exchange too?
Using model one to many for sending message, how to set who have to
get message first/last or at the same time, here described that, but not clear is it on client or server side?
If no consumers, how to re-push message to another queue and close
current?
Each consumer has own queue?
Thank you in advance and any comment to this question!
If you can elaborate some of your questions and include what is your use case, I can edit the answer.
1 - As long as consumer is alive rabbitmq sends incoming messages to consumer. You can give TTL to messages/queues if you want them to expire after some time.
https://www.rabbitmq.com/ttl.html
2 - What you mean?
3 - Rabbitmq stores the data in mnesia database.
https://www.rabbitmq.com/persistence-conf.html
https://www.rabbitmq.com/relocate.html
4 - What you mean by filterig messages and clear queue? Successfully consumed messages removed from the queue immediatly.
5 - You can give ttl to queue or declare queue as auto delete
https://www.rabbitmq.com/ttl.html
https://www.rabbitmq.com/queues.html
6 - If consumers don't send ack to rabbit, messages stays unack as long as memory becomes full or rabbit becomes unavailable
7 - Both. A consumer can create its own queue and bind it to an exchange or it can consume from existing queue. It depends on the use case.
8 - It is hard to answer this without knowing details of what you mean by one-to-many. Direct exchange or fanout or whatelse, how many queues etc.
But, in rabbitmq, messages ordered by publish order by default.
According to link you shared, rabbitmq sends messages first to higher priority consumers until consumer prefetch count (unack messages on consumer) becomes its limits.
9 - You need to handle this case in the code. Or you can use management ui with Shovel plugin.
https://www.rabbitmq.com/management.html
https://www.rabbitmq.com/shovel.html
10 - Again, it depends on the design and use case.
I need to know what is the difference between prefetch count vs no ack in rabbitmq ?
Also
What is the difference between following statements :-
if i set prefetch count say 10 does 10 consumer threads are created ?
Or --
if i register 10 cosumers will it create 10 threads ?
Which of the above is more efficient
To answer this specifically for spring-amqp.
prefetchCount=10 means the broker allows up to 10 unacked message for each consumer; it does not affect the number of threads.
Use concurrentConsumers to create multiple consumers - which will have one thread each.
auto ack means the broker doesn't require acks (so you can lose messages). Spring AMQP also blocks deliveries (to prefetch count) if the listener can't keep up.
Pre-fetch count: How many messages the consumer should read from queue and kept internally rather than picking one message at a time.
No-Ack: Do not acknowledge back that the consumer is done consuming the message.
Those both are used to fine tune your set-up
To address your second part of the question:
If you set prefetch count to 10, 10 consumers won't be created, but your single consumer will fetch 10 messages at a time.
And if you create 10 consumers it will most likely create 10 threads (or processes). It all depends on how you configure it. Most likely you will be wanting to use a thread pool though
I know this question is old, but part of it was never specifically answered, so for anyone who comes here later looking for answers:
If you don't want new messages sent to you as soon as you acknowledge the previous ones, but instead want a message to be sent to you only when you explicitly request one, then you don't want to set up a "consumer" (in RabbitMQ terminology) at all; specifically, you'll want to use AMQP's basic.get operation (which just fetches a single message without creating a consumer) rather the more common basic.consume operation (which registers a consumer that will be sent messages as they become available).
Different libraries and frameworks will have different ways of accomplishing this; for example, in Ruby, using the Bunny client, you can call message = queue.get instead of queue.subscribe do .... In Spring, you'd do something like GetResponse response = channel.basicGet("some.queue", false);.
We have a Java application that gets messages from rabbitmq using Spring AMQP.
For some of the queues, the number of consumers are not increasing resulting in slower messages delivery rate.
e.g. even though the max consumers is set to 50, number of consumers remained 6 for most of the time for the load of 9000 messages.
However, this is not the case with other queues. i..e consumers count reached till 35 for other queues.
We are using SimpleMessageListenerContainer's setMaxConcurrentConsumers API for setting max consumers.
Can someone please help me to understand this?
Configuration:
number of concurrent consumers: 4
number of max concurrent consumers: 50
When asking questions like this, you must always show configuration. Edit your question with complete details.
It depends on your configuration. By default, a new consumer is only added once every 10 seconds, and only if an existing consumer receives 10 messages without any gaps.
If that still doesn't answer your question, turn on DEBUG logging. If you can't figure it out from that, post the log (covering at least startConsumerMinInterval milliseconds) someplace like pastebin or dropbox.
I need to choose a new Queue broker for my new project.
This time I need a scalable queue that supports pub/sub, and keeping message ordering is a must.
I read Alexis comment: He writes:
"Indeed, we think RabbitMQ provides stronger ordering than Kafka"
I read the message ordering section in rabbitmq docs:
"Messages can be returned to the queue using AMQP methods that feature
a requeue
parameter (basic.recover, basic.reject and basic.nack), or due to a channel
closing while holding unacknowledged messages...With release 2.7.0 and later
it is still possible for individual consumers to observe messages out of
order if the queue has multiple subscribers. This is due to the actions of
other subscribers who may requeue messages. From the perspective of the queue
the messages are always held in the publication order."
If I need to handle messages by their order, I can only use rabbitMQ with an exclusive queue to each consumer?
Is RabbitMQ still considered a good solution for ordered message queuing?
Well, let's take a closer look at the scenario you are describing above. I think it's important to paste the documentation immediately prior to the snippet in your question to provide context:
Section 4.7 of the AMQP 0-9-1 core specification explains the
conditions under which ordering is guaranteed: messages published in
one channel, passing through one exchange and one queue and one
outgoing channel will be received in the same order that they were
sent. RabbitMQ offers stronger guarantees since release 2.7.0.
Messages can be returned to the queue using AMQP methods that feature
a requeue parameter (basic.recover, basic.reject and basic.nack), or
due to a channel closing while holding unacknowledged messages. Any of
these scenarios caused messages to be requeued at the back of the
queue for RabbitMQ releases earlier than 2.7.0. From RabbitMQ release
2.7.0, messages are always held in the queue in publication order, even in the presence of requeueing or channel closure. (emphasis added)
So, it is clear that RabbitMQ, from 2.7.0 onward, is making a rather drastic improvement over the original AMQP specification with regard to message ordering.
With multiple (parallel) consumers, order of processing cannot be guaranteed.
The third paragraph (pasted in the question) goes on to give a disclaimer, which I will paraphrase: "if you have multiple processors in the queue, there is no longer a guarantee that messages will be processed in order." All they are saying here is that RabbitMQ cannot defy the laws of mathematics.
Consider a line of customers at a bank. This particular bank prides itself on helping customers in the order they came into the bank. Customers line up in a queue, and are served by the next of 3 available tellers.
This morning, it so happened that all three tellers became available at the same time, and the next 3 customers approached. Suddenly, the first of the three tellers became violently ill, and could not finish serving the first customer in the line. By the time this happened, teller 2 had finished with customer 2 and teller 3 had already begun to serve customer 3.
Now, one of two things can happen. (1) The first customer in line can go back to the head of the line or (2) the first customer can pre-empt the third customer, causing that teller to stop working on the third customer and start working on the first. This type of pre-emption logic is not supported by RabbitMQ, nor any other message broker that I'm aware of. In either case, the first customer actually does not end up getting helped first - the second customer does, being lucky enough to get a good, fast teller off the bat. The only way to guarantee customers are helped in order is to have one teller helping customers one at a time, which will cause major customer service issues for the bank.
It is not possible to ensure that messages get handled in order in every possible case, given that you have multiple consumers. It doesn't matter if you have multiple queues, multiple exclusive consumers, different brokers, etc. - there is no way to guarantee a priori that messages are answered in order with multiple consumers. But RabbitMQ will make a best-effort.
Message ordering is preserved in Kafka, but only within partitions rather than globally. If your data need both global ordering and partitions, this does make things difficult. However, if you just need to make sure that all of the same events for the same user, etc... end up in the same partition so that they are properly ordered, you may do so. The producer is in charge of the partition that they write to, so if you are able to logically partition your data this may be preferable.
I think there are two things in this question which are not similar, consumption order and processing order.
Message Queues can -to a degree- give you a guarantee that messages will get consumed in order, they can't, however, give you any guarantees on the order of their processing.
The main difference here is that there are some aspects of message processing which cannot be determined at consumption time, for example:
As mentioned a consumer can fail while processing, here the message's consumption order was correct, however, the consumer failed to process it correctly, which will make it go back to the queue. At this point the consumption order is intact, but the processing order is not.
If by "processing" we mean that the message is now discarded and finished processing completely, then consider the case when your processing time is not linear, in other words processing one message takes longer than the other. For example, if message 3 takes longer to process than usual, then messages 4 and 5 might get consumed and finish processing before message 3 does.
So even if you managed to get the message back to the front of the queue (which by the way violates the consumption order) you still cannot guarantee they will also be processed in order.
If you want to process the messages in order:
Have only 1 consumer instance at all times, or a main consumer and several stand-by consumers.
Or don't use a messaging queue and do the processing in a synchronous blocking method, which might sound bad but in many cases and business requirements it is completely valid and sometimes even mission critical.
There are proper ways to guarantuee the order of messages within RabbitMQ subscriptions.
If you use multiple consumers, they will process the message using a shared ExecutorService. See also ConnectionFactory.setSharedExecutor(...). You could set a Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor().
If you use one Consumer with a single queue, you can bind this queue using multiple bindingKeys (they may have wildcards). The messages will be placed into the queue in the same order that they were received by the message broker.
For example you have a single publisher that publishes messages where the order is important:
try (Connection connection2 = factory.newConnection();
Channel channel2 = connection.createChannel()) {
// publish messages alternating to two different topics
for (int i = 0; i < messageCount; i++) {
final String routingKey = i % 2 == 0 ? routingEven : routingOdd;
channel2.basicPublish(exchange, routingKey, null, ("Hello" + i).getBytes(UTF_8));
}
}
You now might want to receive messages from both topics in a queue in the same order that they were published:
// declare a queue for the consumer
final String queueName = channel.queueDeclare().getQueue();
// we bind to queue with the two different routingKeys
final String routingEven = "even";
final String routingOdd = "odd";
channel.queueBind(queueName, exchange, routingEven);
channel.queueBind(queueName, exchange, routingOdd);
channel.basicConsume(queueName, true, new DefaultConsumer(channel) { ... });
The Consumer will now receive the messages in the order that they were published, regardless of the fact that you used different topics.
There are some good 5-Minute Tutorials in the RabbitMQ documentation that might be helpful:
https://www.rabbitmq.com/tutorials/tutorial-five-java.html
I have two questions about RabbitMQ Work Queues:
As I understand it from the RabbitMQ tutorials, it seems that if I have a basic queue consumer client (just a basic "Hello, World!" consumer) and then I add a second consumer client for the same queue, then RabbitMQ will automatically dispatch the messages between those two queues in a round robin manner. Is that true (without adding in any extra configuration)?
My consumer clients are configured to only ever receive one message at a time, using (GetResponse response = channel.basicGet("my_queue", false). Since I am only ever receiving one message at a time, is it still necessary to set a prefetchCount (channel.basicQos(1)) for fair dispatch?
Answers to your questions:
Yes
No
However, your two questions 1 and 2 are not compatible. If you are using a consumer, it is designed to have messages pushed to it, and you don't use Basic.Get. When you use a consumer, you will need to use Basic.QoS to specify that the consumer can only "own" one unacknowledged message at a time. RabbitMQ will not push additional messages beyond the QoS limit.
Your alternative is to "pull" from the queue using Basic.Get, and you will control your own destiny as far as how many messages you run at a time.
Does this make sense?