Connecting Redis events to Lua Script execution and concurrency issues - events

I have grouped key value pairs or data structures built using Redisson library. The design is that a change in value of any group of value(s) should be sent as event to subscribing Lua scripts. These scripts then do computations and update another group's key-value pair. This process is implemented as a chain such that once the Lua script updates a key-value per, that in turn generates a event and another Lua script does the work similar to first Lua script based on certain parameters.
Question 1: How to connect the Lua script and the event?
Question 2: Events are pipelined but it may be that my Lua Scripts may have to wait for network IO. In that case, I assume the next event is processed and the subscribing script executed. this for me is a problem because first script hasn't finished updating the key-value pair it needs to and the second script is going ahead with its work. This will cause errors for me. Is there a way to get over this?
Question 3: How to emit events from Redisson datastructures and I need the Lua script to understand that data structure's structure. How?

At the time of writing, Redis (3.2.9) does not allow blocking commands inside Lua scripts, including the subscribe command. So it is impossible to achieve what you have described via Lua script.
However you can do it using Redisson Topic and/or Redisson distributed services:
Modify a value, send a message to a channel. Another process receives the message, do the computation and updating.
Or ...
If there's only one particular process that does the computation and updating, you can use Redisson remote service to tell this process do the work, it works like RPC. Maybe it is able to modify the first value too.
Or ...
Create the whole lot as one runnable job and send it to be processed by a Redisson remote executor. You can also choose to schedule the job if it is not immediately required.

Related

Camunda: Receive multiple, different messages at once

I am currently developing a kinda complex workflow with camunda. The goal of this workflow is to orchestrate the execution of different external business processes. Which includes start, overwatch and synchronize these workflows. Everything besides the synchronization works as expected.
Example:
My example has one main workflow which starts multiple sub workflows. The main workflow has to be aware when all sub workflows are finished. Every sub workflow is triggered by a message and sends a message back to the main workflow at the end of execution. Therefore, all sub workflows should be synchronized in the main workflow.
Xml can be accessed on this site: https://pastebin.com/2aj4z0zU
Unfortunately, this leads to numerous message correlation exceptions at the choke point in the main workflow (1st lane, after the first parallel gateway). I am using the following code to correlate the messages:
this.runtimeService.createMessageCorrelation(messageName)
.processInstanceId(processInstanceId)
.setVariables(payload)
.correlate();
The whole workflow is executable and runs without errors, but only if one example_workflow at a time is executed. Starting multiple example_workflows quickly one after another results in this type of exception randomly for every message type:
ENGINE-16004 Exception while closing command context: Cannot correlate message 'PROCESS_B_FINISHED': No process definition or execution matches the parameters org.camunda.bpm.engine.MismatchingMessageCorrelationException: Cannot correlate message 'PROCESS_B_FINISHED': No process definition or execution matches the parameters
at org.camunda.bpm.engine.impl.cmd.CorrelateMessageCmd.execute(CorrelateMessageCmd.java:88) ~[camunda-engine-7.14.0.jar!/:7.14.0]
Currently, the correlation exceptions occur if a postgresql database is used. The same workflow runs much better, but not perfect, when we use a h2 file-based database. All receive tasks are not configured asynchronously, only send tasks are (async before + exclusive).
Questions:
Is this already the best practice to synchronize multiple messages in one workflow?
What could be the reason for the correlation exceptions while using a postgresql database?
Used software:
spring boot application [Version:2.3.4]
camunda [Version:7.14.0]
h2 [Version:1.4.200]
postgresql [Version:42.2.22]
the process model seems to contain sequences where it can run into a deadlock (What if blue is followed directly by green? Or yellow?) or where you have race conditions. If the process has not reached a state where it is in a receiving state for the message, then the message delivery will fail (as indicated in the error message you shared)
(The reason you are observing the CorellationException more frequently on postgresql if the race condition. With this external database some operations take slightly more time, increasing the chance of the race condition occurring).
The process engine needs to be able to match a message to a unique receiver. If there are multiple potential receivers for the same message name, and no other correlation criteria creating a unique match is provided, then the delivery will also fail. You either need to use unique message names per instance or better use a businessKey or a process data which is unique per instance as additional correlation criteria. This is why it does not work when you run multiple process instances.
Modelling a workflow with this parallel message bottleneck leads to a race condition, as mentioned by #rob2universe's post.
To solve this problem, I had firstly to correlate the messages directly. I did this by adding a unique identifier to every message, which was not a big deal due to the fact that an item ID was defined within the payload of every message. Secondly, I had to remove all asynchronous and exclusive markers for every receive task and connected gateways. And thirdly, I had to reset the job executor properties to default values. Limiting the pool size and jobs per acquisition did not benefit the workflow execution.
After all these changes, my workflow now runs as expected with no errors. Unfortunately, due to the described bottleneck optimistic logging exceptions are common, but the workflow engine handles these exceptions without further errors.

run nifi flow once and notify me when it is finish

I use rest api in my program,I made a processor group for convent a mongodb collection to json file:
I want to run the scheduling only one time,so I set the "Run schedule" to 10000 sec.Then I will stop the group when the data flow have ran one time,and I made a Notify processor and add a DistributedMapCacheService.But the DistributedMapCacheClientService of the Notify processor only comunicates with the DistributedMapCacheService in nifi itself,It never nofity my program.
I try to use my own socket server,but I only get a message "nifi" but no more message.
My question is:If I only want scheduling run once and stop it,how do I know when shall I stop it?Or is there some other way to achieve my purpose,like detect if the json file exists or use incremental data(If the scheduling run twice,the data will be repeated twice)?
As #daggett said you can do it in a synchronous way you can use HandleHttpRequest as trigger and HandleHttpResponse to manage the response.
For an asynchronous was you have several options for the notification like PutTCP, PostHTTP, GetHTTP, use FTP, file system, XMPP or whatever.
If the scheduling run twice the duplicated elements depends on the processors you use, some of them have state others no, but if you are facing problems with repeated elements you can use the DetectDuplicate processor.

Serial consumption between message types

I have a MassTransit system that will consume 2 message types, one for a batch process, the other for CRUD operations on a single entity. Whilst the batch process is running, the CRUD operations should not be de-queued.
Is this possible to achieve using MassTransit? It seems the exchange binding -> type name, would potentially make this behavior difficult.
A solution would be to use one message type to denote both operations and then interrogate the message contents to discern between single and batch but this feels like a code smell. Also, this would require concurrency configuration to ensure only one consumer is ever active.
Can anyone help with an alternative solution here? Essentially, we need to pause all message consumption whilst an event driven process is running.
Thanks in advance.
By pause, do you mean that you want the CRUD operations to be able to occur without being blocked by the batch process? Because if it's only a matter of not having the two separate messages get in the way of each other, the most logical solution is using two separate queues, one receive endpoint for the batch process and another for the CRUD operations.
Now, if you truly need to separate the batch process such that it doesn't happen during the CRUD operations, that will require more work. And what if you receive a CRUD operation while the batch process is already running?
I think the separate queues is your best solution, however.

How to communicate with external system

I'm trying to write a logic (js script) to communicate with external system. As far as understand, logic will be executed on all endorsing peer.
In this case, how can I avoid duplicate operation to external system ? For example, how to increment a value in external database ? If I write a logic to increment the value in js, I think the value will be incremented by all endorsing peer.
I'll appreciate any comment.
Firstly, currently the only way you can interact with external systems is using the experimental post API. This allows your Transaction Processor function to HTTP POST data to an external system and then to process the response.
Documentation here:
https://hyperledger.github.io/composer/integrating/call-out.html
You are correct in stating that if you have 4 peers, then the chain code container for each peer will run your logic, so you'd expect to see 4 calls to your HTTP service. This is required because each peer node is independent and Fabric must achieve consensus across the peers.
The external functions should therefore (ideally) be side-effect free "pure" functions (idempotent), meaning that for a given set of input parameters you always get the same set of output results.
Clearly a function that returns an incrementing integer doesn't fit this description! You probably need to rethink how you are structuring your problem to make it compatible with a decentralised blockchain-based approach.

NSUrlConnection synchronous request without accepting redirects

I am currently implementing code that uses macOS API for HTTP/HTTPs requests in a Delphi/Lazarus program.
The code runs in its own thread (i.e. not main/ui thread) and is part of a larger threading based crawler across Windows/Mac and Delphi/Lazarus. I try to implement the actual HTTP/S request part using the OS API - but handle e.g. processing and taking action upon HTTP headers myself.
This means I would like to keep using synchronous mode if possible.
I want the request to simply return to me what the server returns.
I do not want it to follow redirects.
I currently use sendSynchroniousRequest_returningResponse_error
I have tried searching Google, but it seems there is no way when using synchronous requests? That just seems a bit odd.
No, NSURLConnection's synchronous functionality is very limited, and was never expanded because it is so strongly discouraged. That said, it is technically possible to implement what you're trying to do.
My recollection, from having replaced that method with an NSURLSession equivalent once (to swizzle in a less leaky replacement for that method in a binary-only library), is that you need to basically write a method that uses a shared dictionary to store a semaphore for each NSURLSessionDataTask (using the data task as a key). Then, you set the semaphore's count to zero so that it will block immediately when you wait on it, asynchronously start an asynchronous request on the main thread, and then wait on the semaphore (in the current thread). In the asynchronous data task's completion handler block, you increment the semaphore, thus unblocking the calling thread.
The trick is to ensure that the session runs its callbacks on a thread OTHER than the current one (which is blocked waiting for the semaphore). So you'll need to dispatch_async into the main thread when you actually start the data task.
Ostensibly, if you supported converting the task into a download task or stream task in the relevant delegate method, you would also need to take appropriate action to update the shared dictionary as well, but I'm assuming you won't use that feature. :-)

Resources