In CICS we have something called a ENQ command which is useful for single-threading based on desired values . Similarly do we have anything in Websphere?
ie., I want my MDB to read multiple messages from the input queue. However I want to process the messages strictly in the received order. Setting the value of 'Server session' in the activation spec property to 1 will achieve this but I want to do it programatically within my MDB
Below is a quote from JMS 1.1 specification. It seems that ordering is only guaranteed if you send messages from a single session; in that case the sessions input message stream will be ordered. Since no API exists for limiting session count, I guess you must depend on server facilities for this configuration.
4.4.10 Message Order JMS clients need to understand when they can depend on message order and when they cannot.
4.4.10.1 Order of Message Receipt Messages consumed by a session
define a serial order. This order is important because it defines the
effect of message acknowledgment. See Section 4.4.11 ”Message
Acknowledgment,” for more details. The messages for each of a
session’s consumers are interleaved in a session’s input message
stream. JMS defines that messages sent by a session to a destination
must be received in the order in which they were sent (see Section
4.4.10.2 ”Order of Message Sends,” for a few qualifications). This defines a partial ordering constraint on a session’s input message
stream. JMS does not define order of message receipt across
destinations or across a destination’s messages sent from multiple
sessions. This aspect of a session’s input message stream order is
timing-dependent. It is not under application control.
Related
I am trying to implement an application(Java) which will subscribe to different message types (XMLs) from other different applications via TIBCO EMS. Each of these message types will have a specific purpose. I am of the opinion that I should have multiple queues with multiple subscribers in my application, however, the TIBCO guy is adamant that there should be only one queue where all of these messages will be published and I will have one subscriber and the subscriber then should have logic to different tasks based on the XML received.
Which approach is better? One with multiple queues and subscribers OR the one queue and one subscriber? Please let me know reasons for the choice.
Thanks!
-Naveen
In general, if the same application is reading all the messages, it is much cleaner for that application to have a single input queue instead of multiple input queues. With multiple then the application will need to have logic to know which order to process the queues and so on. With one input queue, the messaging system can deal with the order of the messages - whether FIFO or by priority etc, and the application can just read the next message and process it.
Use unique message header for each type of xml while sending the message. And use message selectors / filters while receiving the same, so that it can be routed / delegated to the respective handler based on the header value. This way, you will be able to handle different type of xml messages by single queue as well.
We are using IBM WebSphere MQ as JMS provider with Spring MDP (Message Driven POJO).
Is there any way in JMS where we can configure time related properties in message so that message can be consumed at particular defined time only?
For example, if I am sending three messages into queue M1, M2 and M3. Where, I can configure M2 message property let say 3 AM. And consumer side, consumer can only pick this message # 3 AM only. If time is not defined, messages should be consumed in a way that JMS Receiver does.
JMS 2.0 specification has defines Delivery Delay. With this feature a message producer can specify that a message must not be delivered until after a specified time interval. The message will be available for delivery after the specified time. But this may not help you as you want to a message to be consumed at a specified time. Typically messaging applications are designed to consume messages as soon as they are made available by the messaging provider.
If you want to process messages at a specified time only, you could create another queue "queue_3am", and schedule a reader to run exactly at 3am.
A variation is to set the timestamp as a message property. So one queue could contain messages to be processed at different points in time. The reader could use message selectors to get relevant messages only.
But you should use a "message pickup timeframe" by adding two timestamps as message properties, for eaxmple set the window to 1 or 5 minutes.
The receiver can use a message selector: A selector is a condition using message properties.
Have a look at this
I have a design query regarding queues. My scenario is as follows:
I have to use a messaging system, with single producer and multiple consumers (asynchronous). The producer pushes different types of messages into the messaging system. Depending upon the message type, that particular consumer has to consume that message. (Each consumer is running on a different server). If one consumer is down and a message comes for that consumer, it will be in the messaging system only. If I use a message queue, the message in the queue will block the next messages that can be consumed by the other consumers. Are queues suitable for handling this kind of situation? Or do we need to go for a topic?
Whether you use a queue or a topic should depend on whether there an instance where multiple consumers must process the same message. If that is the case then a topic is required do generate that one-to-many pattern.
On the other hand, if any one message will only ever be consumed by one consumer, then you can use a queue or topic and the consumers specify the message type as a JMS selector. In this way, all consumers can listen on the same queue and each selects a different subset of messages. In the event one application is not there, it's messages do not "block the next messages that can be consumed by the other consumers" but rather they just stack up in the queue and other consumers still receive their messages based on selection criteria.
Please also realize that queues are lightweight constructions and you can easily have one queue per consumer. Typically, things providing a service listen on a well-known queue and each queue represents a different function of the service or a different service. Thus there may be many service input queues. Similarly, reply messages are generally uniquely addressed to the application instance that made the request and go to a unique, often dynamic, reply-to queue. Both of these implementations I have described lead to a separation of traffic across queues rather than pooling different message types into the same queue. Since JMS selectors always impart an additional processing cost, using more queues is generally more performant than selecting many types of message from the same queue.
I am responding to your question about selectors in the comment section here since I have more space and can put links in...
Section 3.8.1 of the JMS 1.1 spec states:
A JMS message selector allows a client to specify, by message header, the
messages it’s interested in. Only messages whose headers and properties
match the selector are delivered. The semantics of not delivered differ a bit
depending on the MessageConsumer being used. See Section 5.8,
“QueueReceiver,” and Section 6.11, “TopicSubscriber,” for more details.
Message selectors cannot reference message body values.
A message selector matches a message if the selector evaluates to true when
the message’s header field and property values are substituted for their
corresponding identifiers in the selector.
As noted above, selectors can be on fields that are implicit in the message such as MsgID or CorrelationID or thsey can be on fields specifically set by the message producer such as a message property. Either way, the client must specify the value of any selectors used by the message consumer.
I have a MDB which listens to WebSphere MQ. It does not picks up the messages in the order that has been received by the Queue. How can i make it read it in that order? Is it possible? Should i not use a MDB.
In general, WMQ delivers messages in the order that they were received. However, several things can impact that...
If the queue is set to priority instead of FIFO delivery and messages arrive in different priorities, they will be delivered "out of order".
Distinguish between order produced and order delivered. If the messages are produced on a remote QMgr and there are multiple paths to the local QMgr, messages may arrive out of order.
Difference in persistence - if messages are produced on a remote QMgr and are of different persistences, the non-persistent messages may arrive faster than the persistent ones, especially with channel NPMSPEED(FAST) set.
Multiple readers/writers - Any dependency on sequence implies a single producer sending to a single consumer over a single path. Any redundancy in producers, consumers or paths between them can result in messages delivered out of sequence.
Syncpoint - To preserve sequence, ALL messages must be written and consumed under syncpoint or else ALL must be written and consumed outside of syncpoint.
Selectors - These specifically are intended to deliver messages out of order with respect to the context of all messages in the queue.
Message groups - Retrieval of grouped messages typically waits until the entire group is present. If groups are interleaved, messages are delivered out of sequence.
DLQ - if the target queue fills, messages may be delivered to the DLQ. As the target queue is drained, messages start going back there. With a queue near capacity, messages can alternate between the target queue and DLQ.
So when an MDB is receiving messages out of order any of these things, or even several of them in combination, may be at cause. Either eliminate the dependency on message sequence (best choice) or else go back over the design and reconcile all the factors that may lead to out-of-sequence processing.
To add to T.Rob's list, MDBs use the application server WorkManager to schedule message delivery, so message order is also dependent on the order in which the WorkManager starts Work items. This is outside the control of WMQ. If you limit the MDB ServerSessionPool depth to one, then this limit is removed as there will only ever be one in-flight Work instance, but at the cost of reducing maximum throughput.
If you're running in WebSphere application server, then non-ASF mode with ListenerPorts can preserve message order subject to some transactional/backout caveats. There's a support technote here:
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21446463
I have a single AMQ queue that receives simple messages with string body. Consider I'm sending CLSIDs as message bodies. CLSIDs could be not unique, but I'd like to reject all messages with not unique bodies and keep only single instance of such messages in the queue. Is there any simple way to do it?
Currently I'm using a workaround. Messages from the queue are consumed by some processor that tries to insert bodies into a simple DB table with UNIQUE constraint applied to message_body field. If processor inserts the messages succesfuly - it's assigned to exchange.out.body and sent to other queue. If ConstraintViolationException is thrown - nothing is resent to other queue.
I would like to know does AMQ support something similar out of the box?
I believe you can write an interceptor for activemq where you can perform certain actions on messages. Check out: http://activemq.apache.org/interceptors.html
That being said, in my personal opinion this is bad practice. ActiveMQ is a messaging system which should only be responssible for transport of the message. All logic can beter be performed using your application ( either make sure the sender cannot send the same message more then once OR , create an intermediate consumer which indeed matches the received body with a database that contains already seen message bodies BEFORE, routing the message to the actual receiver queue)