is it possible to use xsd on WCF consumer side? - wcf

I want to connect to an IBM WebSphere queue as a consumer. I have the xsd of the types that I will get on this queue.
Is it possible to use WCF and this way make the connection between the receiving object and generate this receiving object to class?
What I mean is that I want to connect to the queue and by using WCF and the xsd that I hold I will receive the real object that the producer is adding the the queue for me.
Is it possible ?
How to do it ?

Related

Mass Transit + Azure Service Bus: Consume some types of messages without creating their corresponding topic

As I have been able to verify, in MassTransit with Azure Service Bus, each type of object consumed by a "Consumer" generates a Topic for that type regardless of whether it is only consumed in a specific "receive endpoint" (queue). When sending a message of this type with the "Send()" method, the message is sent directly to the "receive endpoint" (queue) without going through the topic. If this same message is published with the "Publish()" method, it is published in the Topic, and is forwarded to the receive endpoint (queue) from the corresponding subscriber.
My application uses a CQRS pattern where the messages are divided into commands and events. Commands use the send-receive pattern and are therefore always dispatched in MassTransit with the "Send()" method. The events, however, are based on the publish-subscribe pattern, and therefore are always dispatched in MassTransit with the "Publish()" method. As a result, a large number of topics are created on the bus that are never used (one for each type of command), since the messages belonging to these topics are sent directly to the receiver's queue.
For all these reasons, the question I ask is whether it is possible to configure MassTransit so that it does not automatically create the topics of some types of messages consumed because they will only be sent using the "Send()" method? Does this make sense in MassTransit or is it not possible/recommended?
Thank you!
Regards
Edited 16/04/2021
After doing some testing, I edit this topic to clarify that the intention is to configure MassTransit so that it does not automatically create the topics of some types of messages consumed, all of them received on the same receive endpoint. That is, the intention is to configure (dynamically if possible, through the type of object) which types of messages consumed create a topic and which do not in the same receive endpoint. Let's imagine that we have a receive endpoint (a queue) associated with a service, and this service is capable of consuming both commands and events, since the commands are only dispatched through Send(), it is not necessary to create the topic for them, however the events that are dispatched via Publish(), they need their topic (and their subscribers) to exist in order to deliver the message and be consumed.
Thanks in advance
Yes, for a receive endpoint hosting a consumer that will only receive Sent messages, you can specify ConfigureConsumeTopology = false for that receive endpoint. You can do that via a ConsumerDefinition, or when configuring the receive endpoint directly.
UPDATE
It is also possible to disable topology configuration per message type using an attribute on the message contract:
[ConfigureConsumeTopology(false)]
public interface SomeCommand
{
}
This will prevent the topic/exchange from being created and bound to the receive endpoint.
While I can understand the desire to be "pure to the CQRS mantra" and only Send commands, I'd suggest you read this answer and take it into consideration before overburdening your developers with knowing every single endpoint in the system by name...

Using Grizzly with JMS/ActiveMQ

I'm working on proof-of-concept project designed to explore the benefits of offloading work from a NIO server to a message queue for backend processing. I'm using Grizzly for the NIO boilerplate stuff, and Spring Integration for the messaging (with JMS/ActiveMQ as the messaging implementation). Basically, what I want to do is this:
Client connection -> Server -> Server creates "work-to-be-done" message -> JMS/ActiveMQ
On the ActiveMQ message queue, a number of "workers" will be actively consuming these messages, processing them, and placing the result on another queue. The server is listening for "response messages" on that queue, and once a message is picked up it will execute the following:
Response queue -> Server serializes the message to something the client can understand -> back to the client
My immediate problem is my lack of understanding of Grizzly, specifically how to decouple the event handling from the messaging. The server has to create the work-to-be-done message in such a way that when the reply message comes back from the worker, the server knows who the client was (find the related FilterChainContext in Grizzly) in order to send the tcp message.
I might be able to use FilterChainContext.getAddress() and place that on the work message, but I'm not sure how to code a method which takes a peer address and a message and somehow sends that (FilterChainContext.write()) when it has no FilterChainContext.
I'm playing with the idea now of keeping a Map around, but I'm apprehensive about this approach because I don't want stuff to go stale in a map if something happens to the message during serialization or processing.
Ideas and suggestions are welcome.
-Michael
You could use the TCP adapters/gateways (which have an option to use NIO), together with custom (de)serializers. If you must use Grizzly, you could write a server connection factory implementation. In the case of the outbound adapter (or inbound gateway), the endpoint is registered as a 'TcpListener' (using the connectionId) and the SI message contains the IpHeaders.CONNECTION_ID header used to determine which connection gets the reply. When a connection closes, it is unregistered (removed from the map).

Bulk calls vs multiple calls in WCF using MSMQ

I am calling a WCF service which contains the business logic to process the message objects.
I need to pass the id of the message to WCF service. We are using MSMQ for queuing up the requests.
There could be multiple messages that WCF service need to process which can be handled as follows
Send the message id one by one
Send array of message ids and then WCF service will iterate through each id and process the message object.
Performance point of view I believe second option is better as multiple requests to WCF are not there.
Is my assumption correct?
-
Ram
Number 2 is more efficient in terms of latency but does not give you the chance to spread the processing load by having multiple queue readers
Also be aware that if you use a transactional queue and sessions then WCF may put more than one SOAP message in each MSMQ message

Need some help/advice on WCF Per-Call Service and NServiceBus interop

I have WCF Per-Call service which provides data for clients and at the same time is integrated with NServiceBus.
All stateful objects are stored in UnityContainer which is integrated into custom service host.
NServiceBus is configured in service host and uses same container as service instances.
Every client has its own instance context(described by Juval Lowy in his book in chapter about Durable Services).
If I need to send request over bus I just use some kind of dispatcher and wait response using Thread.Sleep().Since services are per-call this is ok afaik.
But I am confused a bit about messages from bus, that service must handle and provide them to clients. For some data like stock quotes I just update some kind of stateful object and and then, when clients invoke GetQuotesData() just provide data from this object.
But there are numerous service messages like new quote added and etc.
At this moment I have an idea to implement something like "Postman daemon" =)) and store this type of messages in instance context. Then client will invoke "GetMail()", receive those messages and parse them. Problem is that NServiceBus messages are "Interface based" and I cant pass them over WCF, so I need to convert them to types derived from some abstract class.
I Don't know what is best way to handle this situation.
Have you considered a "pure" NServiceBus solution for communicating back to clients? NServiceBus already has that "Postman daemon" capability. NServiceBus messages don't have to be interfaces - you can use regular classes as well.
Hope that helps.

WCF MSMQ callback function

I have a system that sends a object to another service via WCF using MSMQ. The service picks the message up fine and does what it have to with it. But the problem i have now is that i need to send a response to the calling system.
Example:
Create a Customer object
Populate the information
Send the message to the service using WCF over MSMQ
Pick the message up from the queue using a windows service
Call Customer.Insert() method on the windows service
I now need to send the new customer id back to the calling application here.
Any ideas?
As Emmanuel points out - MSMQ messages are by design one-way and have no response, really.
Your best solution would be to have a response queue where the "other service" can drop his response messages into. Your client would then have to monitor that queue, e.g. check it once in a while (every minute, every 30 minutes - whatever makes sense for you) for new messages, and handle those.
There's no duplex (two-way) MSMQ channels - but you can easily create a pair of separate queues for both directions.
Marc
you can use duplex communication with msmq but not natively, take a look to my article
MSMQ Operation needs to one way, the only way I can think of receiving back a message is for your calling application to also Host a service for responses since there's no duplex MSMQ binding.