Re: Testing failover on dispatcher/java-broker cluster

[Antoine Chevin]

Hi Ted,

Do you have any insights into that problem?

Thanks,
Antoine

> Hi Ted,
>
> You’re right, the connection close looked strange before stopping of the
broker. I manually added the annotation (# stopping the broker) and was
wrong about the position of this one. I replayed the test and the
connection close happens *after* the broker stop. I assume it is the broker
that initiates it.
>
> I found something interesting. In my test, I always sent a message when
the broker is down, expecting to get a JmsSendTimedOutException (waiting
for the disposition frame). I assumed this was harmless. But it turns out
this is not. When I don’t do that, I can send a message after the broker
restart. So to sum up the experiment I did:
>
> * I use Wireshark between the JMS client and the dispatcher. *
>
> 1)  Using JMS I establish a connection to the dispatcher and create a
> message producer (Wireshark: connection open -> attach)
> 2)  I’m able to send a message to the broker through the dispatcher (
> Wireshark: transfer -> disposition)
> 3)  I stop the broker
> 4)  With the same link, I send a message and I get a
> JmsSendTimedOutException (waiting for the disposition frame) (Wireshark:
> transfer)
> 5)  I restart the broker
> 6)  With the same link, I try to send a message and I get a
> JmsSendTimedOutException for the same reason (waiting for the disposition
> frame) (Wireshark: transfer)
>
> If I skip step (4), I cannot reproduce step (6) and my messages arrive
> (Wireshark: transfer -> disposition) to the restarted broker.
>
> I hope it makes it clearer for you. Sorry for my rookie mistakes :-).
>
> Note: My colleague and I ran a small experiment to identify if the
problem comes from JMS or the AMQP protocol. He changed the code of the
java broker to not send the disposition frame one time out of two.
>
> We got these results:
>
> * I use Wireshark between the JMS client and the patched broker. *
>
> 1) Using JMS I establish a connection to the patched broker and create a
message producer (Wireshark: connection open -> attach)
> 2)  I send a message to the broker and it replies with the disposition
frame (Wireshark: transfer -> disposition)
> 3) I send a message to the broker which drops the disposition frame. I
get a send timeout in JMS (Wireshark: transfer)
> 2)  I send a message to the broker and it replies with the disposition
frame
> (Wireshark: transfer -> disposition). It works fine.
>
> We assume that there is something going on in the dispatcher.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Antoine

Qpid proton C++ supports failover url?

[adelboutros]

Hello,


Does the Proton C++ API support the failover url just like JMS does?

If no, what workarounds could I use?


Regards,

Adel


Get Outlook for Android

Re: Qpid proton C++ supports failover url?

[Olivier Mallassi]

We may be able to use load balancer like HAProxy (level 4)
But retry has to be handled; maybe proton-c provide something.

On Friday, 16 September 2016,  wrote:

>
>
> Hello,
>
>
> Does the Proton C++ API support the failover url just like JMS does?
>
> If no, what workarounds could I use?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Adel
>
>
> Get Outlook for Android
>
>
>

Re: [QPID C++][Java JMS client] Data gets corrupted when sent to the server over SSL

[Gordon Sim]

On 16/09/16 12:39, Morgan Lindqvist wrote:

Hi all,

I have an issue that data gets corrupted if the size is 66068 but not if it
is 65068 or smaller when using the JavaJMS client. The server is QPIC C++
and SSL encryption is used.

If I instead use a Node JS based client I have no issues with the size of
the messages. I have sent a 1MB large message and it came through as it
should.

Is there a setting in a client that changes how it behaves when it comes to
large messages?

I guess there could be a bug in the QPID C++ server implementation that is
triggered by the JMS client. Any opinions on this?

I have been searching for related issues and I only found this one,
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-537, but it is solved.


Any pointer what could be the issue and how I could solve it?

(I can not use the Node JS client, I need a Java client)


Could you try with the AMQP 1.0 JMS client? (Latest version is 0.11.0)


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org

[QPID C++][Java JMS client] Data gets corrupted when sent to the server over SSL

[Morgan Lindqvist]

Hi all,

I have an issue that data gets corrupted if the size is 66068 but not if it
is 65068 or smaller when using the JavaJMS client. The server is QPIC C++
and SSL encryption is used.

If I instead use a Node JS based client I have no issues with the size of
the messages. I have sent a 1MB large message and it came through as it
should.

Is there a setting in a client that changes how it behaves when it comes to
large messages?

I guess there could be a bug in the QPID C++ server implementation that is
triggered by the JMS client. Any opinions on this?

I have been searching for related issues and I only found this one,
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-537, but it is solved.


Any pointer what could be the issue and how I could solve it?

(I can not use the Node JS client, I need a Java client)


Best Regards,
Morgan

Environment information:

Server:
QPID C++ server version 1.35.0 (from PPA Testing
https://launchpad.net/~qpid/+archive/ubuntu/testing)
OS: Ubuntu 14.04
AMQP version: 1.0

Client with issue:
QPID Java JMS client
Version 6.0.4
Java version: 1.8.0_101

Client that works:
Node JS AMQP10: https://www.npmjs.com/package/amqp10
Version: 3.2.5
Node version: 4.5.0




--
View this message in context: 
http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/QPID-C-Java-JMS-client-Data-gets-corrupted-when-sent-to-the-server-over-SSL-tp7650810.html
Sent from the Apache Qpid users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org

Re: Testing failover on dispatcher/java-broker cluster

[Ted Ross]

Antoine,

I think I know what that problem is.  I belileve you've stumbled upon 
this issue:


https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-496

Your second delivery, the one resulting in a timeout, is causing the 
inbound link to be blocked (i.e. it has undelivered messages).  When the 
broker reattaches, the blocked links are supposed to become unblocked 
but they don't in the case of auto-links.


This has been fixed on the master branch if you'd like to try applying 
the patch.


-Ted

On 09/15/2016 04:56 AM, Antoine Chevin wrote:

Hi Ted,

You’re right, the connection close looked strange before stopping of the
broker. I manually added the annotation (# stopping the broker) and was
wrong about the position of this one. I replayed the test and the
connection close happens *after* the broker stop. I assume it is the broker
that initiates it.

I found something interesting. In my test, I always sent a message when the
broker is down, expecting to get a JmsSendTimedOutException (waiting for
the disposition frame). I assumed this was harmless. But it turns out this
is not. When I don’t do that, I can send a message after the broker
restart. So to sum up the experiment I did:

* I use Wireshark between the JMS client and the dispatcher. *

1)  Using JMS I establish a connection to the dispatcher and create a
message producer (Wireshark: connection open -> attach)
2)  I’m able to send a message to the broker through the dispatcher (
Wireshark: transfer -> disposition)
3)  I stop the broker
4)  With the same link, I send a message and I get a
JmsSendTimedOutException (waiting for the disposition frame) (Wireshark:
transfer)
5)  I restart the broker
6)  With the same link, I try to send a message and I get a
JmsSendTimedOutException for the same reason (waiting for the disposition
frame) (Wireshark: transfer)

If I skip step (4), I cannot reproduce step (6) and my messages arrive
(Wireshark: transfer -> disposition) to the restarted broker.

I hope it makes it clearer for you. Sorry for my rookie mistakes :-).

Note: My colleague and I ran a small experiment to identify if the problem
comes from JMS or the AMQP protocol. He changed the code of the java broker
to not send the disposition frame one time out of two.

We got these results:

* I use Wireshark between the JMS client and the patched broker. *

1) Using JMS I establish a connection to the patched broker and create a
message producer (Wireshark: connection open -> attach)
2)  I send a message to the broker and it replies with the disposition
frame (Wireshark: transfer -> disposition)
3) I send a message to the broker which drops the disposition frame. I get
a send timeout in JMS (Wireshark: transfer)
2)  I send a message to the broker and it replies with the disposition frame
(Wireshark: transfer -> disposition). It works fine.

We assume that there is something going on in the dispatcher.


Thanks,
Antoine



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org