OK, get that so far - so both consumers need to declare and use the same 
exchange.

But If I understand the next step right, to get multiple consumers of  info 
notification messages they would all need to create separate 
"notifications.info" queues into that exchange.    And isn't that exactly what 
Nova currently does to create a shared queue ?

Phil

From: Kiall Mac Innes [mailto:ki...@managedit.ie]
Sent: 09 May 2012 10:51
To: Day, Phil
Cc: openstack@lists.launchpad.net; Russell Bryant; Doug Hellmann
Subject: Re: [Openstack] [nova] why does notification use a "topic" exchange 
instead of "fanout"?


Your own queue listener should attempt to declare the exchange, using the same 
settings as Nova does.

If the exchange exists, its a noop. Otherwise it's created for you.

After that, if you start up Nova, it will do the same and reuse your exchange.

Obviously this works both ways, and either nova or your code can declare the 
exchange.

AMQP is designed to be a configuration-less protocol, where resources are 
configured by the first consumer attempting to use them.

Thanks,
Kiall

Sent from my phone.
On May 9, 2012 9:52 a.m., "Day, Phil" 
<philip....@hp.com<mailto:philip....@hp.com>> wrote:
Hi Doug,

> I think you missed my main point, which was that a topic exchange does
> not impose a limitation that only one client can consume a given
> notification.  That's only true if each client is consuming from the
> same queue bound to the exchange.

So just to be clear, if I understand you correctly within the nova service/rpc 
abstraction layers the code is set up so that all services do bind to the same 
queue, and hence we get the round-robin delivery.
But, if someone wanted to write a separate notification consumer so that they 
didn't block anyone else from seeing the same messages then they (the consumer) 
should create a new queue on the existing topic exchange.

Is that correct - and is there any worked example of doing this ?

I thought within the nova code both the exchange and topic queues were set up 
by the consumer (so for example all compute_managers try to create the 
"compute" exchange and topic queue, but its only created by the first one and 
the others connect to the same queue).   In that context I'm finding it hard to 
see how to change this model to have multiple "notify.info<http://notify.info>" 
topic queues into the same exchange ?

Cheers,
Phil




From: 
openstack-bounces+philip.day=hp....@lists.launchpad.net<mailto:hp....@lists.launchpad.net>
 
[mailto:openstack-bounces+philip.day<mailto:openstack-bounces%2Bphilip.day>=hp....@lists.launchpad.net<mailto:hp....@lists.launchpad.net>]
 On Behalf Of Doug Hellmann
Sent: 08 May 2012 23:34
To: Russell Bryant
Cc: openstack@lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack@lists.launchpad.net>
Subject: Re: [Openstack] [nova] why does notification use a "topic" exchange 
instead of "fanout"?


On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Russell Bryant 
<rbry...@redhat.com<mailto:rbry...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On 05/08/2012 05:59 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>     Here is a relevant section pulled out of the amqp 0-9-1 spec:
>
>        3.1.3.3 The Topic Exchange Type
>
>        The topic exchange type works as follows:
>
>            1. A message queue binds to the exchange using a routing
>               pattern, P.
>            2. A publisher sends the exchange a message with the routing
>               key R.
>            3. The message is passed to the message queue if R matches P.
>
>        The routing key used for a topic exchange MUST consist of zero or
>        more words delimited by dots. Each word may contain the letters A-Z
>        and a-z and digits 0-9.
>
>        The routing pattern follows the same rules as the routing key with
>        the addition that * matches a single word, and # matches zero or
>        more words. Thus the routing pattern *.stock.# matches the routing
>        keys usd.stock and eur.stock.db but not stock.nasdaq.
>
>     In nova, for a given topic such as 'scheduler', all of the consumers are
>     binding to the same queue on the topic exchange, resulting in
>     round-robin delivery to each of the consumers.  If instead you make a
>     new queue, you can get your own copy of each message.
>
>     There is an additional benefit of using a topic exchange here.  The
>     topic used for notifications is 'notifications.<priority>'.  That means
>     that when you create your queue, you can set it up to receive all
>     notifications, or only notifications of a certain priority.
>
>
> Topic exchanges make a lot of sense for messages that should only be
> consumed once, such as tasks. Notifications are different. Lots of
> different clients might want to know that some event happened in the
> system. The way things are in Nova today, they can't. The first client
> who consumes a notification message will prevent all of the other
> clients from seeing that message at all.
I think you missed my main point, which was that a topic exchange does
not impose a limitation that only one client can consume a given
notification.  That's only true if each client is consuming from the
same queue bound to the exchange.

Yes, that wasn't obvious from any of the kombu documentation I've seen so far. 
I'll keep looking.

Thanks,
Doug


> I can change Nova's notification system to use a fanout exchange (in
> impl_kombu.py changing the exchange type used by NotifyPublisher), but
> before I submit a patch I want to make sure the current implementation
> using a topic exchange wasn't selected deliberately for some reason.
I think using a fanout exchange would be a downgrade.  As I mentioned
before, a topic exchange allows you to create a queue to get all
notifications or only notifications of a specific priority.  If the
exchange type is changed to fanout, it's everybody gets everything, and
that's it.

--
Russell Bryant


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to     : 
openstack@lists.launchpad.net<mailto:openstack@lists.launchpad.net>
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to     : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to