I am using Avro and Schema registry with my Spring Kafka setup.
I would like to somehow handle the SerializationException, which might be thrown during deserialization.
I found the following two resource:
https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-kafka/issues/164
How do I configure spring-kafka to ignore messages in the wrong format?
These resources suggest that I return null instead of throwing an SerializationException when deserializing and listen for KafkaNull. This solution works just fine.
I would however like to be able to throw an exception instead of returning null.
KIP-161 and KIP-210 provide better features to handling exceptions. I did find some resources mentioning KIP-161 in Spring Cloud, but nothing specific about Spring-Kafka.
Does anyone know how to catch SerializationException in Spring Boot?
I am using Spring Boot 2.0.2
Edit: I found a solution.
I would rather throw an exception and catch it than having to return null or KafkaNull. I am using my custom Avro serializer and deserializer in multiple different project, some of which are not Spring. If I changed my Avro serializer and deserializer then some of the other projects would need to be changed to expect the deserializer to return null.
I would like to shutdown the container, such that I do not lose any messages. The SerializationException should never be expected in production. The SerializationException should only be able to happen if Schema Registry is down or if an unformatted message somehow is sent to the production kafka. Either way, SerializationException should only happen very rarely, and if it happens then I want to shutdown the container such that no messages are lost and I can investigate the issue.
Just take into consideration that will catch all exceptions from your consumer container. In my specific case I just want to only shutdown if it is a SerializationException
public class SerializationExceptionHandler extends ContainerStoppingErrorHandler {
#Override
public void handle(Exception thrownException, List<ConsumerRecord<?, ?>> records, Consumer<?, ?> consumer,
MessageListenerContainer container) {
//Only call super if the exception is SerializationException
if (thrownException instanceof SerializationException) {
//This will shutdown the container.
super.handle(thrownException, records, consumer, container);
} else {
//Wrap and re-throw the exception
throw new KafkaException("Kafka Consumer Container Error", thrownException);
}
}
}
This handler is passed to the consumer container. Below is an example of a
KafkaListenerContainerFactory bean.
#Bean
public KafkaListenerContainerFactory<ConcurrentMessageListenerContainer<Integer, String>>
kafkaListenerContainerFactory(JpaTransactionManager jpa, KafkaTransactionManager<?, ?> kafka) {
ConcurrentKafkaListenerContainerFactory<Integer, String> factory =
new ConcurrentKafkaListenerContainerFactory<>();
factory.setConsumerFactory(consumerFactory());
factory.setConcurrency(1);
factory.getContainerProperties().setPollTimeout(3000);
factory.getContainerProperties().setErrorHandler(new SerializationExceptionHandler());
factory.getContainerProperties().setTransactionManager(chainedTxM(jpa, kafka));
return factory;
}
There is nothing Spring can do; the deserialization occurs before the consumer gets any data. You need to enhance the deserializer.
I would however like to be able to throw an exception instead of returning null.
That won't help anything since Kafka won't know how to deal with the exception. Again; this all happens before the data is available so returning null (or some other special value) is the best technique.
EDIT
In 2.2, we added an error handling deserializer which delegates to the actual deserializer and returns null, with the exception in a header; the listener container then passes this directly to the error handler instead of the listener.
Related
public UserMailDto getUserByEmail(String email) throws UserExceptionMessage {
try {
return userRepository.searchByMail(email);
} catch (DataAccessException | JDBCConnectionException accessException) {
com.example.user_service.config.log.Logger.errorLog("UserService", accessException.getMessage());
throw new DataAccessExceptionMessage(Messages.ERROR_TRY_AGAIN + accessException.getMessage());
}
}
In my view you should handle it, but not with a try..catch block in what seems to be your service. Why are you catching the Exception and then rethrowing you own custom Exception with a message? You will need to handle that Exception at some point in your code to. So you are not really handling it here.
It looks like you are building a web app, so I would recommend that you handle your Exceptions in one central place in a #ControllerAdvice class. You can read about it here. This way you can really handle the Exception, by returning a corresponding status code to the user. 503 in your case.
I'm trying to add custom headers on my message, so whenever an exception occurs and it ends up in the dead-letter-queue, I can see what the exception was. However all my attempts at this have failed.
using .setHeader()
setting header on the outMessage
setting property of the exchange
Setting the exception as a property in the payload is not allowed.
#Component
public class ProcessRoute extends RouteBuilder {
...
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
onException(Exception.class)
.log("Error for ${body}! Requeue")
.redeliveryDelay(2000)
.maximumRedeliveries(3)
.handled(true)
.setHeader("TEST", constant("TEST"))
.process(e -> {
e.getOut().setHeader("TEST", "TEST");
e.setProperty("TEST","TEST");
});
from(SOME_ROUTE)
.doSomeStuff()
.to(RABBITMQ);
}
...
}
RABBITMQ-string:
rabbitmq://foo
?exchangeType=topic
&addresses=localhost:1234
&routingKey=#
&autoDelete=false
&queue=bar
&autoAck=false
&deadLetterExchange=DLX
&deadLetterQueue=bar.dlq
&deadLetterExchangeType=direct
&deadLetterRoutingKey=#
&username=foo
&password=bar
Resulting message on the dead-letter-queue:
If you use a header key following the pattern that the Camel RabbitMQ component has established, then your custom header will get picked up when the message is published to RabbitMQ.
Taking from your code above, instead of:
.setHeader("TEST", constant("TEST"))
Do this:
.setHeader("rabbitmq.TEST", constant("TEST"))
The Camel RabbitMQ component seems to ignore all the other non- "rabbitmq.*" headers that might be on the Camel exchange, and probably for good reason. There could be quite a few and most of them wouldn't make sense in the context of a message published to RabbitMQ.
i use #restcontrolleradvice and #ExceptionHandler , but i can handle controller exception. server error like 404, 500 can't handle.
#RestControllerAdvice
public class HttpExceptionHandler {
private static final Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(HttpExceptionHandler.class);
#ExceptionHandler(value = Exception.class)
public String exceptions(Exception e) {
String code = Global.ERR_UNKNOWN;
if (e instanceof MethodNotAllowedException) {
code = Global.ERR_HTTP_METHOD;
}
return code;
}
}
If you're using Spring Boot, this is already done for you and you can customize this support as well quite easily (see Spring Boot reference docs).
If you're using plain Spring Framework, then you need to register a custom WebExceptionHandler bean to handle that (see Spring Framework reference docs). Because those errors can happen at any point during request handling (i.e. not only during the controller handling phase, but also during response encoding, within a WebFilter...), the API there is quite low level and you need to deal with raw DataBuffer instances. If you're looking for inspiration on how to achieve higher level error handling support, you can also take a look at what's done in Spring Boot.
As per Customizing Error Handling "Throwing the exception in the catch block will forward the message to the error queue. If that's not desired, remove the throw from the catch block to indicate that the message has been successfully processed." That's not true for me even if I simply swallow any kind of exception in a behavior:
public override async Task Invoke(IInvokeHandlerContext context, Func<Task> next)
{
try
{
await next().ConfigureAwait(false);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
}
}
I put a breakpoint there and made sure execution hit the catch block. Nevertheless after intimidate and delayed retries messages inevitably ends up in error queue. And I have no more Behaviours in the pipeline besides this one.
Only if I run context.DoNotContinueDispatchingCurrentMessageToHandlers(); inside the catch block it prevents sending error to the error queue, but it also prevents any further immediate and delayed retries.
Any idea on why it works in contravention of Particular NserviceBus documentation is very appreciated
NserviceBus ver. used: 6.4.3
UPDATE:
I want only certain type of exceptions not being sent to an error queue in NServiceBus 6, however to make test case more clear and narrow down the root cause of an issue I use just type Exception. After throwing exception, execution certainly hits the empty catch block. Here is more code to that:
public class EndpointConfig : IConfigureThisEndpoint
{
public void Customize(EndpointConfiguration endpointConfiguration)
{
endpointConfiguration.DefineEndpointName("testEndpoint");
endpointConfiguration.UseSerialization<XmlSerializer>();
endpointConfiguration.DisableFeature<AutoSubscribe>();
configure
.Conventions()
.DefiningCommandsAs(t => t.IsMatched("Command"))
.DefiningEventsAs(t => t.IsMatched("Event"))
.DefiningMessagesAs(t => t.IsMatched("Message"));
var transport = endpointConfiguration.UseTransport<MsmqTransport>();
var routing = transport.Routing();
var rountingConfigurator = container.GetInstance<IRountingConfiguration>();
rountingConfigurator.ApplyRountingConfig(routing);
var instanceMappingFile = routing.InstanceMappingFile();
instanceMappingFile.FilePath("routing.xml");
transport.Transactions(TransportTransactionMode.TransactionScope);
endpointConfiguration.Pipeline.Register(
new CustomFaultMechanismBehavior(),
"Behavior to add custom handling logic for certain type of exceptions");
endpointConfiguration.UseContainer<StructureMapBuilder>(c => c.ExistingContainer(container));
var recoverability = endpointConfiguration.Recoverability();
recoverability.Immediate(immediate =>
{
immediate.NumberOfRetries(2);
});
endpointConfiguration.LimitMessageProcessingConcurrencyTo(16);
recoverability.Delayed(delayed =>
{
delayed.NumberOfRetries(2);
});
endpointConfiguration.SendFailedMessagesTo("errorQueue");
...
}
}
public class CustomFaultMechanismBehavior : Behavior<IInvokeHandlerContext>
{
public override async Task Invoke(IInvokeHandlerContext context, Func<Task> next)
{
try
{
await next().ConfigureAwait(false);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
}
}
}
UPDATE 2
I think I know what's going on: message is handled by first handler that throws an exception which is caught by the Behavior catch block, but then NServiceBus runtime tries to instantiate second handler class which is also supposed to handle the message (it handles class the message is derived from). That's where another exception is thrown in a constructor of one of dependent class. StructureMap tries to instantiate the handler and all its dependent services declared in the constructor and in the process runs into the exception. And this exception is not caught by CustomFaultMechanismBehavior.
So my I rephrase my question now: Is there any way to suppress errors (ignore error queue) occurring inside constructor or simply during StructureMap classes initialization? Seems like the described way does not cover this kind of situations
Your behavior is activated on Handler invocation. This means you are catching exceptions happening inside the Handle method so any other exception, e.g. in the Constructor of the handler would not be caught.
To change the way you 'capture' the exceptions, you can change the way the behavior is activated, e.g. change it from Behavior<IInvokeHandlerContext> to Behavior<ITransportReceiveContext> which is activated when the transport receives a message. You can investigate on different stages and behaviors to see which one suits your purpose best.
I have a WCF service that's hosted in IIS, and uses a WS HTTP binding (the external service). This service ends up calling a second WCF service that's hosted in a Windows service, over Net TCP (the internal service). When the internal service throws a FaultException, the external service crashes rather than throwing it to the client. All the client sees is the connection being forcibly closed.
The internal service uses the Enterprise Library Validation Application Block to validate the incoming messages. When validation errors occur, the service throws a FaultException<ValidationFault>.
Both the internal and external service have a [FaultContract(typeof(ValidationFault)] attribute in the service contract. If I change the external service to just immediately throw a new FaultException<ValidaitonFault>, this gets back to the client fine. I can catch the exception from the internal service in the external service, but if I try to re-throw it, or even wrap it in a new exception and throw that, the whole Application Pool in IIS crashses. I can't see anything useful in the event log, so I'm not sure exactly what the problem is.
The client object the external service uses to communicate with the internal service is definitely being closed and disposed of correctly. How can I get the internal service's faults to propagate out to the client?
updated:
Below is a simplified version of the external service code. I can catch the validation fault from the internal service call. If I throw a brand new FaultException<ValidationFault>, everything is fine. If I use the caught exception, the connection to the external client is broken. The only difference I can see is when debugging the service - trying to use the caught exception results in a message box appearing when exiting the method, which says
An unhandled exception of type
'System.ServiceModel.FaultException`1'
occurred in mscorlib.dll
This doesn't appear if I throw a brand new exception. Maybe the answer is to manually copy the details of the validation fault into a new object, but this seems crazy.
public class ExternalService : IExternalService
{
public ExternalResponse DoSomething(ExternalRequest)
{
try
{
var response = new ExternalResponse();
using (var internalClient = new InternalClient())
{
response.Data = internalClient.DoSomething().Data;
}
return response;
}
catch (FaultException<ValidationFault> fEx)
{
// throw fEx; <- crashes
// throw new FaultException<ValidationFault>(
// fEx.Detail as ValidationFault); <- crashses
throw new FaultException<ValidationFault>(
new ValidationFault(new List<ValidationDetail> {
new ValidationDetail("message", "key", "tag") }),
"fault message", new FaultCode("faultCode"))); // works fine!
}
}
}
I have almost the exact design as you and hit a similar issue (not sure about a crash, though!).
If I remember correctly, even though the ValidationFault is a common class when the Fault travels over the wire the type is specific to the WCF interface. I think this is because of the namespace qualifiers on the web services (but this was a while back so I could be mistaken).
It's not terribly elegant, but what I did was to manually re-throw the exceptions:
try
{
DoStuff();
}
catch (FaultException<ValidationFault> fe)
{
HandleFault(fe);
throw;
}
...
private void HandleFault(FaultException<ValidationFault> fe)
{
throw new FaultException<ValidationFault>(fe.Detail as ValidationFault);
}
Well, it works if I do this, but there must be a better way...
This only seems to be a problem for FaultException<ValidationFault>. I can re-throw FaultException and FaultException<SomethingElse> objects with no problems.
try
{
DoStuff();
}
catch (FaultException<ValidationFault> fe)
{
throw this.HandleFault(fe);
}
...
private FaultException<ValidationFault> HandleFault(
FaultException<ValidationFault> fex)
{
var validationDetails = new List<ValidationDetail>();
foreach (ValidationDetail detail in fex.Detail.Details)
{
validationDetails.Add(detail);
}
return new FaultException<ValidationFault>(
new ValidationFault(validationDetails));
}