I have read a couple of articles which tells us about the communication between microservices, I have chosen the event based communication between microservices pattern, but now I am wondering how the client is supposed to communicate, if it sends a request to the API gateway, should it wait for a response (which might take time due to the event based nature of communication between the microsrvices internally) or should it say "processing" and do polling to check if the request was completed?
What is the standard practice for client --> api gateway --> microservices communication?
Most of the time you will find that Clients --> API Gateway --> Microservice communication is actually synchronous, which means that client would need to wait and block until a response is received. Typically it is implemented as a HTTP based call that the client fires to the API gateway and then reaches the microservice at the back. This doesn't seem to be the kind of event based communication that you are talking about.
The standard practice for event based communication would be something like : Client --> Event/Message Broker --> Microservice this is an asynchronous approach where the Client doesn't block/wait for a response. However, the client would need to have a back channel event handling process that is listening to the communication to handle the response that comes back from the microservice. Microservice --> Event/Message Broker --> Client.
Related
Whereas the corporate environment I am working in accepts the use of http(s) based request response patterns, which is OK for GraphQL Query and Mutation, they have issues with the use of websockets as needed for GraphQL Subscription and would prefer that the subscription is routed via IBM MQ.
Does anyone have any experience with this? I am thinking of using Apollo Server to serve up the GraphQL interface. Perhaps there is a front-end subscription solution that can be plugged in using IBM MQ? The back end data sources are Oracle databases.
Message queues are usually used to communicate between services while web sockets are how browsers can communicate with the server over a constant socket. This allows the server to send data to the client when a new event of a subscription arrived (classically browsers only supported "pull" and could only receive data when they asked for it). Browsers don't implement the MQ protocols you would need to directly subscribe to the MQ itself. I am not an expert on MQs but what is usually done is there is a subscription server that connects to the client via web socket. The subscription service then itself subscribes to the message queue and notifies relevant clients about their subscribed events. You can easily scale the subscription servers horizontally when you need additional resources.
In microservice architecture, It is suggested that:
client app to API gateway communication should be synchronous (like
REST over http).
API gateway to micro-service communication should also be
synchronous
But service to service communication should be asynchronous.
Another rule you should try to follow, as much as possible, is to use
only asynchronous messaging between the internal services, and to use
synchronous communication (such as HTTP) only from the client apps to
the front-end services (API Gateways plus the first level of
microservices).
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/microservices-architecture/architect-microservice-container-applications/asynchronous-message-based-communication
Now, If I understood it right, when user requests to API gateway, and in turn it calls the fist service, it will return a acknowledgement (with some GUID) which will be passed to client application. But services will keep on executing the request.
Now the question pop ups, how will they notify the client application when the request is processed completely. One way is that client can check the status using the GUID passed to it.
But can it be done with some push notification? How can we integrate server to server push notification?
I have little bit different understanding on this as it says communication between services should be asynchronous while communication to API gateway and API gateway to service should be rest API.
so we don't need to do anything as these are simple API calls and pipeline will handle request-response tracking while asynchronous calls between services will increase the throughput of the service.
Now, If I understood it right, when user requests to API gateway, and in turn it calls the fist service, it will return a acknowledgement (with some GUID) which will be passed to client application. But services will keep on executing the request.
No, the microservices should not continue to execute the request, it is already finished. They will, when it is required, update their internal cache (local representation to be more precise) of the needed remote data (data from the microservice that executed the request) when that remote data has changed. The best way to do that update is using integration events (i.e. when a microservice executes a request that mutates the data, it publishes an event to the subscribed microservices).
The microservices should not communicate not even asynchronously in order to fulfill a request from the gateway or clients. They should use background tasks to prepare the data ahead of time for when a request comes.
You're depicting a scenario where the whole interaction between the system and external actors (to be rude, the users) follows an asynchronous model. This is perfectly reasonable, but just if you really need it. Matter of fact, if you are choosing to let 'the outside' interact with your system through REST APIs, maybe you don't need it at all.
If the system receives requests through a synchronous application endpoint, such as REST endpoint, it has to complete requests before to send a response, otherwise it would be meaningless. consider an API like
POST users/:username/notifications
a notification is synchronous by it's nature, but the the request just states that 'a new notification should be appendend to the notifications collection of user'. The API responds 201 that means 'ok, the notification is already associated with the user, it will be pushed on some channel, eventually'. This is a 'transactional' way to describe an asynchronous interaction
Another scenario comes when the user wants to subscribe the notification channel. I expect that this would be implemented with a bi-directional, asynchronous, pubsub communication protocol, such as websockets.
In both cases, however, doesn't matter how microservices communicate with each other, if the request is synchronous, the first service of 'the chain' should wait until is ready to respond. This is the reason beacause API gateway forwards the request in http.
On the other hand, aynchronous communication could be used to enforce consistency between services, instead of to make the actual communication. Let's say that the Orders service sends data to a broker. each time some attribute on the orders[orderId] is changed, it published the change in /orders/:orderId topic. At the same time, expose an internal http point. each service caches data from the services which depends on. The user service make a GET /orders/:orderId , while sends a response to the requester, puts the data in a local cache and subscribes the orders/:orderId topic. each time that a 'mutation' is sent on this topic, the User service catches it and applies the mutation on the corresponding cached object. The communication is syncrhonous, keeps to be synchronous and it' relatively simple to manage; at the same time your system can hold replicated data and be still [eventually] consistent
how is that possible that a REST Microservice can communicate with another Microservice which is a hybrid, which means he can communicate with REST and with a Message Queue. For Example an API-Gateway. For the outside world, he is able to communicate with an App, Mobilephone via REST but the communication from the backend is via message queue.
Use case:
My homepage wants to get a Vehicle from the database. He asks the API-Gateway via a GET-Request. The API-Gateway takes the GET-request and publishes it into the message queue. The other Microservice takes the message and publishes the result. Then the API-gateway consumed the result and send it back as a response.
How can I implement it? Am I using Spring boot with Apache Kafka? Do I need to implement an asynchronous communication?
(Sorry its german)
There are some approaches to solve this situation.
You might create topics for each client request and wait for the reply on the other side, e.g, DriverService would read the request message, fetch all your data and publish it to your client request topic. As soon as you consume the response message, you destroy that topic.
BUT 'temporary' topics might take too long to be delete(if no configuration avoids that, such as delete.topic.enable property) in a request-response interaction, and you need to monitor possible topics overgrowth.
Websocket is another possible solution. Your client would start listening to a specific topic, previously agreed with your server, then in a specific timeout you would wait for the response, when your DriverService would publish to that specific socket channel.
Spring Boot offers you great starters for Kafka and Websockets. If you are expecting a large amount of transactions, I would go with a mixed strategy, using Kafka to help my backend scale and process all transactions, then would respond to client via Websocket.
Currently I'm building an application in a micro service architecture.
The first application is an API that does the user authentication, receive requests to initiate/keep a realtime connection with the user (via Socket.io or SockJS) and the system store the socket id into the User object.
The second application is a WORKER doing some stuff and sometime he has to send realtime data to the user.
The question is: How should the second application (the WORKER) send realtime data to the user?
Should the WORKER send a message to the API then the API forward this message to the user?
Or the WORKER can directly send the message to the user?
Thank you
In a perfect world example, the service that are responsible to send "publish" a real time push notifications should be separated from other services. Since the micro service is a set of narrowly related methods, and there is no relation between the authentication "user" service, and the realtime push notification service. And to a deep break down, the authentication actually is a separate service, this only FYI, There might be a reason you did this way.
How the service would communicate? There is actually many ways how to implement the internal communication between the services, MQ solution, which could add more technology to your stack, like Rabbit MQ, Beanstalk, Gearman, etc...
And also you can do the communication on top of HTTP protocal, but you need to consider that the HTTP call will add more cost.
The perfect solution is that each service will have to interfaces to execute on their behalf, HTTP interface and an MQ interface (console)
I have a Java application which I make available via RESTful web services. I want to create a mechanism so clients can register for notifications of events. The rub is that there is no guarantee that the client programs will be Java programs and hence I won't be able to use JMS for this (i.e. if every client was a Java app then we could allow the clients to subscribe to a JMS topic and listen there for notification messages).
The use case is roughly as follows:
A client registers itself with my server application, via a RESTful web service call, indicating that it is interested in getting a notification message anytime a specific object is updated.
When the object of interest is updated then my server application needs to put out a notification to all clients who are interested in being notified of this event.
As I mentioned above I know how I would do this if all clients were Java apps -- set up a topic that clients can listen to for notification messages. However I can't use that approach since it's likely that many clients will not be able to listen to a JMS topic for notification messages.
Can anyone here enlighten me as to how this problem is typically solved? What mechanism can I provide using a RESTful API?
I can think of four approaches:
A Twitter approach: You register the Client and then it calls back periodically with a GET to retrieve any notifications.
The Client describes how it wants to receive the notification when it makes the registration request. That way you could allow JMS for those that can handle it and fall back to email or similar for those that can't.
Take a URL during the registration request and POST back to each Client individually when you have a notification. Hardly Pub/Sub but the effect would be similar. Of course you'd be assuming that the Client was listening for these notifications and had implemented their Client according to your specs.
Buy IBM WebSphere MQ (MQSeries). Best IBM product ever. Not REST but it's great at multi-platform integration like this.
We have this problem and need low-latency asynchronous updates to relatively few listeners. Our two alternative solutions have been:
Polling: Hammer the list of resources you need with GET requests
Streaming event updates: Provide a monitor resource. The server keeps the connection open. As events occur, the server transmits a stream of event descriptions using multipart content-type or chunked transfer-encoding.
In the response to the RESTful request, you could supply an individualized RESTful URL that the client can monitor for updates.
That is, you have one URL (/Signup.htm, say), that accepts the client's information (id if appropriate, id of object to monitor) and returns a customized url (/Monitor/XYZPDQ), where XYZPDQ is a UUID created for that particular client. The client can poll that customized URL at some interval, and it will receive a notification if the update occurs.
If you don't care about who the client is (and don't want to create so many UUIDs) you could just have separate RESTful URLs for each object that might want to be monitored, and the "signup" URL would just return the correct one.
As John Saunders says, you can't really do a more straightforward publish/subscribe via HTTP.
If polling is not acceptable I would consider using web-sockets (e.g. see here). Though to be honest I like the idea suggested by user189423 of multipart content-type or chunked transfer-encoding as well.