I am new to RabbitMQ and I am working on an application that will receive information from many devices and route all messages into a couple of queues depending on the MQTT topic. I was able to get all of this working easily, but now I am looking into how to push a message to a queue when a client connects or disconnects from RabbitMQ in order to update the current status of the client in my database. Is there a way to do this?
Event Exchange Plugin
Client connection, channels, queues, consumers, and other parts of the system naturally generate events. For example, when a connection is accepted, authenticated and access to the target virtual host is authorised, it will emit an event of type connection_created. When a connection is closed or fails for any reason, a connection_closed event is deleted.
Unfortunately the rabbitmq_event_exchange is created after importing bindings from definition.json. Which means that the amq.rabbitmq.event cannot be bound to a queue via the configuration and must be bound after the start.
Related
Consider a small chat server. In this server, the actual processing of messages is done by nodes of a service called "chat". Communications of this service along with a "user" service are then aggregated via a "gateway" service in front that is the only service that actually communicates with the users and is in charge of passing requests received to other services via the RabbitMQ channel they share.
In a system designed like this, each user is connected to one of the instances of the "gateway" service and when sending and receiving messages indirectly communicates with the private "chat" or "user" services behind. To load balance this, we have an Nginx reverse-proxy on the edge that tries to distribute requests to different "gateway" instances. But since WebSocket connection is real-time, "chat" instances should also be able to send messages to the right instance of the "gateway" in charge of that specific user for user-specific messages and to all "gateway" instances for site-wide messages. This is a problem since with RabbitMQ I don't believe we can target a specific subscriber and even if we could, we don't know to which instance that specific user is connected right now.
Therefore, since we are using Socket.io for WebSocket connection, I am thinking of adding a new Redis node to the stack to allow this communication between different instances of the "gateway" service. This is directly supported by Socket.io and works alright and removes all sorts of limitations imposed by the RabbitMQ, however, we are still using RabbitMQ to route a message from a "chat" instance to a "gateway" instance that then will propagate through the Redis service and when the right "gateway" instance having access to the user is found, delivered to them.
This adds unnecessary lag to user-specific outbound messages. So here I am asking if anyone has a better idea of how this problem should be approached and how to decrease this lag.
Personally, I have this idea of adding Socket.io to "chat" services (with no client access) and use its backend to send the message directly to the Redis store so that the instance of the "gateway" connected to it can route it directly to the user, going over the whole RabbitMQ thing for this type of messages.
It might be important to mention that none of these services are here just to do this specific thing, RabbitMQ is heavily used for communication between different services acting as the message broker and the "gateway" service works with multiple other services for data aggregation, authentication and data validation and transformation. The above example was a simplified version of the problem at hand with the minimum number of moving parts that I could easily describe here.
Edit: To send messages directly to socket.io redis store, the following library can be used apparently not to load the whole socket.io library:
https://github.com/socketio/socket.io-redis-emitter
I have a webpage connecting to a rabbit mq broker using javascript/websockets that are exposed by a spring app deployed in tomcat. Messages are produced 1 per second by an external application and are rendered on the webpage. The javascript subscription is durable.
The issue I'm experiencing is that when the network connection is broken on the javascript client for a period of time (say 60 seconds), the first ~24 seconds of messages are missing. I've looked through the logs of the app deployed in tomcat and the missing messages seem to be up until the following log statement:
org.springframework.messaging.simp.stomp.StompBrokerRelayMessageHandler - DEBUG - TCP connection to broker closed in session 14
I think this is the point at which the endpoint realises the javascript client is disconnected and decides to close the connection to the broker resulting in future messages queueing up.
My question is how can I ensure that the messages between the time the network is severed and the time the endpoint realises the client is disconnected are not lost? Should the endpoint put the messages back on the queue somehow? Maybe there's a way to make it transactional?
Thanks in advance.
The RabbitMQ team monitors this mailing list and only sometimes answers questions on StackOverflow.
Your Tomcat application should not acknowledge messages from RabbitMQ until it confirms that your Javascript client has received them. This way, any messages that aren't ack-ed by the JS client won't be ack-ed by Tomcat, and RabbitMQ will re-deliver them.
I don't know how your JS app and Tomcat interact, but you may have to implement your own ack process there.
I wish to run an experiment in which the publisher loses connection with the broker and then enqueues messages in its own queue and then when it regains connectivity it sends all its queued messages to the broker. How can I I do this since if I call close connection, I can no longer send(raises an exception). A trick that I can think of is to use a network of two brokers and simulate the above by breaking the connection between the two brokers. Is there an API call that I can use to do the above?
This is very much like facebook messenger or whatsapp acting as a publisher and enqueuing our to-send messages if we are offline and sending them once we are connected.
There is plenty of solutions you could use to break the connection in order to test, here is a non-comprehensive list :
Make a script that can set/unset a firewall rule on your environement blocking the connection port
If you are working with VMs, you can suspend/resume the one running Activemq, you can even automate it with tools like vagrant (vagrant suspend, then vagrant up)
Tweak the connection manualy accessing the activemq jmx
Develop an activemq plugin able to trash connections on demand (or maybe there is one ?)
Now in order to have the behavior you wish to obtain there is two options :
1) Make sure your connection is failover so it can be reestablished, and store your message on disk before sending them with your producer.
2)Produce to a local broker embbeded in your app, and connect this one to the remote broker.
I'm using celery 3.0.18 with RabbitMQ 3.0.2. I have a task sent to another application by using celery.send_task, and I can see the send_task call in my logs, I can see the packets leaving the worker instance, and I can see the packets reaching the RabbitMQ instance when I call tcpflow -ce -i any port 5672, however, only the first message gets to the queue. They all have the same routing key, I tried recreating the exchange and bindings, and even a new RabbitMQ instance, and nothing seems to work. This used to work fine for months, until we had to rebuild the RabbitMQ from scratch after a crash in our AWS infrastructure. Strangely, I have the exact same setup working on other application, using the same broker and the same exchange, binding and queue, and it works perfectly there. Also, it works when I send the messages to the same exchange using the same call from a management script, running from the shell on the same instance, but it doesn't work when it's sent from the celery task in the worker process.
Any ideas on what the problem might be?
Eventually, I figured what's wrong, but it's not clear if this is the expected behavior, a celery bug, or a RabbitMQ bug.
What happens is that besides our application tasks, I have a custom logging handler used to send logs to a central location using RabbitMQ, using celery.send_task. This logging handler sends messages to an exchange named application.logger, with a routing key like application.logger.info, application.logger.warning, etc, and have bindings to route some logging levels to specific queues. This exchange, bindings and queues were created directly in RabbitMQ and not defined in Celery routes.
When the worker tries to send a message to this exchange and it doesn't exist, Celery would log a 404 NOT_FOUND error. After that, tasks sent to other exchanges using the same connection weren't delivered. They were sent by the worker instance, we could see the packets arriving and the RabbitMQ management screen for that connection even shows the data arriving from the client in kb/s, but no messages were delivered.
I've got an iOS application which uses a STOMP Client to talk to RabbitMQ. The application loads a lot of state during startup, and then keeps that state in sync by receiving updates published on STOMP. Of course, if it loses its connection, it can no longer be sure it's in sync, and therefore has to re-load that large initial blob. Any kind of network interruption triggers this behavior and makes my customers sad.
There are a lot of big-picture ways to fix this (and I'm working on them) but in the meantime, I'm trying to use persistent queues to solve this problem. The idea is that the server will create a queue, bind it to the appropriate topics, and then start building the large startup bundle. When finished, it will hand everything off to the client. The client will set itself up with the startup bundle, open a subscription to the queue, and then process any updates which happened while the server was getting things ready. Similarly, if the client should become disconnected, it can simply reconnect and resume reading the messages it finds in the queue.
My problem is that while the client successfully receives messages sent after it connects, if there were any messages in the queue before it connected, they are not read. Likewise, if the client becomes disconnected, when it reconnects, it won't see any messages which arrived while it was away.
Can anyone suggest how I might get the client to be able to read those missing messages?
It turns out what was happening was that the STOMP adapter was consuming the messages but failing to deliver them. Thus, when the client reconnected, it wouldn't have any messages waiting for it.
To fix the problem, I changed the "ack" setting on the subscribe request to "client", meaning that STOMP shouldn't consider the message delivered until the client sends back an ACK frame. By changing my client appropriately, messages now get delivered even after the client has been away.