So using JMS and ActiveMQ, I can be sure that my message sent from my Spring Boot application using JmsTemplate will reach it's destination application even if that destination application is down at the time I send the message to ActiveMQ. As when the destination application starts up, it grabs the message from the queue. Great!
However.
What happens if my Spring Boot application tries to send a JMS message to a queue on the ActiveMQ server, but the ActiveMQ server is down at that point or the network is down and I get a connection refused exception?
What is the recommended way to make sure my application keeps trying to re-sends the message to ActiveMQ until it is successful? Is this something I have to develop into my application myself? Are there any nifty Spring tools or annotations which do this for me? Any advice on best practice or how I should be handling this scenario?
You can try Spring-Retry. Has lots of fine grain controls for it:
http://www.baeldung.com/spring-retry
https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-retry
If it is critical that you don't lose this message, you will want to save it to some alternative persistent store (e.g. filesystem, local mq server) along with whatever retry code you come up with. But for those occasional network glitches or a very temporary mq shutdown/restart, Spring-Retry alone should do the trick.
Couple of approaches I can think of
1. You can set up another ActiveMq as fallback. In your code you don't have to do anything, just change your broker url from
activemq.broker.url=tcp://amq01.blah.blah.com:61616
to
activemq.broker.url=failover:(tcp://amq01.blah.blah.com:61616,tcp://amq02.blah.blah.com:61616)?randomize=false
The rest is automatically taken care of. i.e. when one of them is down, the messages are sent to other.
Another approach is to send to a internal queue (like seda, direct) when activemq is down and read from there.
Adding failover to the url is one appropriate way.
And another reasonable way is to making sure activemq always online , as activemq has the master-slave mode(http://activemq.apache.org/masterslave.html) to get high availability.
I want to know the major difference between VM and JMS component of Mule ESB. Can someone help me to know it.
As per Mule documentation, VM transport is for intra-JVM communication between Mule flows. So, that means when you use a VM in your flow, you can communicate between different flows in the application.
A flow containing VM inbound cannot be called externally from external application as thus the flow is equivalent to a private flow used within the application. By default uses in-memory queues.
Please go through the documentation :- https://docs.mulesoft.com/mule-user-guide/v/3.8/vm-transport-reference
On the other hand as per Mule documentation, JMS is an external host, allows communication between different components of a distributed application and JMS transport lets you easily send and receive messages to queues and topics for any message service which implements the JMS specification.
A flow, which has JMS inbound can be called from externally unlike VM. Documentation is here :- https://docs.mulesoft.com/mule-user-guide/v/3.8/jms-transport-reference
Within the application, if you send the control from one flow to another flow we use VM.VM can be used as both inbound and outbound.
Outside the application, for example, A application want to send something to B application(external application) there we use JMS.
I want my system to guarantee there is no data loss even if the system is shutting down.
What this mean is that the system must not miss the request message. So, I will change the way that accept http reqeust. Now, I am using http gateway/webservice gateway in spring integration. But, This isn't receive the message even if the system dies. So, I want to add the queue between the http client and the http receiver. So, I want to use a queue channel. Here is the question.
① I have to install other queue program such as activemq or rabbitmq and have to connect to the queue channel in spring integration?
② and which one is the best combination with spring integration? I heard that rabbit mq is the best one.
please give me a elaborate explanation. thanks.
First of all you description isn't clear...
If you don't want to lose messages from the QueueChannel use some Persistence MessageStore, like JdbcChannelMessageStore:
http://docs.spring.io/spring-integration/docs/latest-ga/reference/html/system-management-chapter.html#message-store
From other side there are channel wrappers for the AMQP as well as for JMS:
http://docs.spring.io/spring-integration/docs/latest-ga/reference/html/amqp.html#d4e5846
http://docs.spring.io/spring-integration/docs/latest-ga/reference/html/jms.html#jms-channel
Which really provide the same persistence durability, fault tollerant options for your use-case.
Re. activemq VS rabbitmq. I can say by my own expiriance that the last one is better, by configuration, usage from Spring Integration (Spring AMQP is under the shell). And its performance is really better.
All other info you can find in the Internet.
I have a application in which I need to route my JMS messages to different managed servers based on some selector value. But I cannot use JMS bridges for the purpose as the application has more than 20 managed servers in production.so with the JMS bridge approach, it will become a hurdle for the deployment team to do such huge configuration.
Maybe You could try to use the Mule ESB or other ESB approach. I recommend the Mule ESB because it's simple, well documented and pretty lightweight.
For me JMS and ESB seem to be very related things and I'm trying to understand how exactly they are related.
I've seen a sentence that JMS can be used as a transport for ESB - then what else except the transport should be present in such an ESB? Is JMS a simple ESB or if not, then what it lacks from the real ESB?
JMS offers a set of APIs for messaging: put a message on a queue, someone else, sometime later, perhaps geographically far away takes the message off the queue and processes it. We have decoupled in time and location of the message provider and consumer. Even if the message consumer happens to be down for a time we can keep producing messages.
JMS also offers a publish/subscribe capability where the producer puts the message to a "topic" and any interested parties can subscribe to that topic, receiving messages as and when they are produced, but for the moment focus just on the queue capabilty.
We have decoupled some aspects of the relationship between provider and consumer. However some coupling remains. First, as things stand every message is processed in the same way. Suppose we want to introduce different kinds of processing for different kinds of messages:
if ( message.customer.type == Platinum )
do something special
Obviously we can write code like that, but an alternative would be to have a messaging system that can send different messages to different places we set up three queues:
Request Queue, the producer(s) puts their requests here
Platinum Queue, platinum consumer processing reads from here
Standard Queue, a standard consumer reads messages from here
And then all we need is a little bit of cleverness in the queue system itself to transfer then messsage from the Request Queue to the Platinum Queue or Standard Queue.
So this is a Content-Based Routing capability, and is something that an ESB provides. Note that the ESB uses the fundamental Queueing capabilities offered by JMS.
A second kind of couppling is that the consumer and producer must agree about the message format. In simple cases that's fine. But when you start to have many producers all putting message to the same queue you start to hit versioning problems. New message formats are introduced but you don't want to change all the existing providers.
Request Version 1 Queue Existing providers write here
Request Version 2 Queue New provider write here, New Consumer Reads here
And the ESB picks up the Version 1 Queue messages and transforms them into Version 2 messages and puts them onto the Version 2 queue.
Message transformation is another possible ESB capability.
Have a look at ESB products, see what they can do. As I work for IBM, I'm most familiar with WebSphere ESB
I would say ESB is like a facade into a number of protocals....JMS being one of them.
An addition to the above list is the latest Open Source ESB - UltraESB
JMS is not well suited for the integration of REST services, File systems, S/FTP, Email, Hessian, SOAP etc. which are better handled with an ESB that supports these types natively. For example, if you have a process that dumps a CSV file of 500MB at midnight, and you want another system to pickup the file, parse CSV and import into a database, this can easily be accomplished by an ESB - whereas a solution with just JMS will be bad. Similarly, integration of REST services, with load balancing/failover to multiple backend instances can be done better with an ESB supporting HTTP/S natively.
This Transformation does not happen automatically. You need to configure the mapping or write transformation service
Look at https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/docs/en-US/JBoss_Enterprise_SOA_Platform/4.2/html/SOA_ESB_Message_Transformation_Guide/ch02s03.html
Regards,
Raja Nagendra Kumar,
C.T.O
www.tejasoft.com
ESB offers integration with a lot of different protocols in addition to JMS.
Most use JMS behind the scenes to transfer, stor and move messages. One such solution OpenESB, uses XML format messages.
There are open source ESB which you could checkout -
OpenESB
Apache Camel
MuleESB
WSO2 ESB
JMS implementation like ActiveMQ come with Camel inbuilt into them.
JMS is a protocol for communicating with an underlying messaging layer. ESB operates at a higher level, offering integration with multiple technologies and protocols, one of which would be JMS, in a uniform way that makes management of complex flows much simpler.
There are JMS message brokers , that you can easily configure with ESB. https://docs.wso2.com/display/ESB470/JMS+Transport
JMS and ESB both provide a way of communication between different applications. But the context for JMS and ESB are different. JMS is for simple need. JMS is implemented by JMS Provider. It is Java specific.
Examples of JMS Providers are: Apache Active MQ, IBM MQ, HornetQ etc.
ESB is for complex need. ESB is a component in EAI providing communication facility to various applications. It is generic & not specific to Java. JMS is one of the supported protocols.
Examples of ESB provider are: MuleESB, Apache Camel, OpenESB
Use Case: It may be an overhead to use ESB, if all our communicating applications are in Java and are using the same message format. Here JMS may be sufficient.