jms queues has jmsdeliverycount.If message read from queue one more time we can track with this property.What is the equvaliant of this RabbitMQ .net.
I want to check how many times this message read from queue(in transactional reads)
Currently there is nothing out-of-the-box. All you get is a redelivery flag to say it has been redelivered, but not how many times.
You can track this issue.
Quorum queues track the number of redeliveries, in the x-delivery-count header. See here
There is a feature request to add the same to classic queues.
Related
I have started with ActiveMQ just one day ago, so my knowledge on it is limited.
My target is to check the ActiveMQ stability and throughput in different scenario for JMS message.
So, following is one scenario.
1. I am publishing 1 mil non-persistent synchronous messages to topic and subscribing it synchronously non durable manner. One publisher and one subscriber.
2. The broker, publisher and subscriber is up during the test.
Unfortunately nearly most of the times(only one time I got all messages out of 14 try), I am not getting all the messages(1 mil) in subscriber end. nearly 5500 messages are lost.
I did the same test for tibco ems and ibm mq and did not get this issue.
So, for ActiveMQ, if I need all messages to be received, is it necessary to use persistent message and durable subscriber always?
Don't think form the angle of guaranteed messaging or fail-over scenario.
Any suggestion is welcome.
Thanks,
Smith
Not sure about your exact scenario. But ActiveMQ will limit the memory used for buffering messages when the producer is faster than the consumer by dropping old messages above a certain limit.
This is configurable.
I'm trying to achieve load balancing between different types of messages. I would not know in advance what the messages coming in might be until they hit the queue. I know I can try resequencing the messages, but I was thinking that maybe if there was a way to have the various consumers round robin between either queues or between topics, this would solve my problem.
The main problem i'm trying to solve is that I have many services sending messages to one queue with many consumers feeding off one queue. I do not want one type of service monopolizing the entire worker cluster. Again I don't know in advance what the messages that are going to hit the queue are going to be.
To try to clearly repeat my question:
Is there a way to tell the consumers to round robin between either existing queues or topics?
Thank you in advance.
I found the answer to my question on another post just had to know to look there. I resolved my problem by not creating AMQ consumer but a JMS listener with a composite destination as specified in this post: jms-listener-dynamically-choose-destinations. It turns out the JMS listener automatically round robins though all the queues you assign to it.
Consumers on a Queue will already do round robin processing of the messages on the Queue. The one thing to keep in mind is consumer prefetch which can allow one consumer to grab many messages before others arrive on the Queue so you may need to adjust prefetch depending on your scenario.
Read up on the differences between Queue and Topic here.
I have a rabbitmq cluster used as a working queue. There are 5 kinds of consumers who want to consume exactly the same data.
What I know for now is using fanout exchange to "copy" the data to 5 DIFFERENT queues. And the 5 consumers can consume different queue. This is kind of wasting resources because the data is the same in file queues.
My question is, does rabbitmq support to push the same data to multi consumers? Just like a message need to be acked for a specified times to be deleted.
I got the following answer from rabbitmq email group. In short, the answer is no... and what I did above is the correct way.
http://rabbitmq.1065348.n5.nabble.com/Does-rabbitmq-support-to-push-the-same-data-to-multi-consumers-td36169.html#a36170
... fanout exchange to "copy" the data to 5 DIFFERENT queues. And the 5 consumers can consume different queue. This is kind of wasting resources because the data is the same in file queues.
You can consume with 5 consumers from one queue if you do not want to duplicate messages.
does rabbitmq support to push the same data to multiple consumers
In AMQP protocol terms you publish message to exchange and then broker (RabbitMQ) decide what to do with messages - assume it figured out the queue message intended for (one or more) and then put that message on top of that queue (queues in RabbitMQ are classic FIFO queues which is somehow break AMQP implementation in RabbitMQ). Only after that message may be delivered to consumer (or die due to queue length limit or per-queue or per-message ttl, if any).
message need to be acked for a specified times to be deleted
There are no way to change message body or attributes after message being published (actually, Dead Letter Exchanges extension and some other may change routing key, for example and add,remove and change some headers, but this is very specific case). So if you want to track ack's number you have to re-publish consumed message with changed body or header (depends on where do you plan to store ack's counter, but headers fits pretty nice for this.
Also note, that there are redeliverd message attribute which denotes whether message was already was consumed, but then redelivered. This flag doesn't count redelivers number so it usage is quite limited.
I am starting with ActiveMQ and I have a usecase. i have n producers sending messages into a Queue Q1. I want to stop the delivery of messages (i.e. i do not want consumers to consume those messages). I want to store the messages for sometime without those being consumed.
I was looking at ways this can be achieved. These two things came into my mind based on what i browsed through.
Using Mirrored queues, so that I can wiretap the messages and save into a virtual queue.
Possibly stop consumers from doing a PULL on the queue.
Another dirty way of doing this is by making consumers not send ack messages once its consumed a message from the queue.
We are currently not happy with either of these.
Any other way you can suggest.
Thanks in advance.
If you always want message delivery to be delayed you can use the scheduler feature of ActiveMQ to delay delivery until a set time or a fixed delay etc.
Other strategies might also work but it really up to you to design something that fits your use case. You can try to use Apache Camel to define a route that implements the logic of your use case to either dispatch a message to a Queue or send it to the scheduler for delayed processing. It all really depends on your use case and requirements.
I'm using NServiceBus 4.x with RabbitMQ 3.2.x as my transport.
I made the assumption that by using RabbitMQ as my transport I would be given the competing consumer model as an option. I understand that NServiceBus employs the "Fannout" exchange type for all exchanges and does not support round robin at this time. However is there a way to configure NServiceBus to take advantage of the levels of indirection via Exchanges and channels that RabbitMQ offers.
I have several consumers I would like to compete for messages from a given queue. What I am observing is subscribers' blocking access to further message retrieval from the queue until the message is consumed. So having more then one consumer at this point does me no good other then redundancy.
After reading some documentation on RabbitMQ I'm assuming that it's normal to block until the Ack receipt is sent from the subscriber. But I had assumed that subscriber #2 would have free access to the queue to fetch another message.
There is mention of increasing the prefetch count on RabbitMQ channel.
Example:
channel.BasicQos(0,prefetchcount,false)
I don't see anywhere that I can change this setting via configuration in NServiceBus. Furthermore as I read what prefetch does I'm really not sure this what i'm looking for.
Is it possible to use RabbitMQ with out a distirbutor type pattern used with MSMQ? Or should I move to MassTransit or Rebus?
Put prefetchcount=2 in your connection string. Any value above 1 will tell the broker to allow more than X unacked message to go out. You need to fiddle with this setting to find the optimum for your scenario.