Dear Robbie,
Thank you very much for the clarification.
Now it is clear why I was actually getting the "local-idle-timeout expired"
errors.
Is there a way in which I can implement myself a separate thread to send
heartbeat packets using a BlockingConnection, so that I can, for instance,
sleep inside the while loop and have, in any case, a working heartbeat
mechanism?
What I am currently missing is if there is a method or function to send an
"(empty)" heartbeat packet over a blocking connection, without the need of
sending it to some topic or queue through a sender.
Thank you very much,
Francesco
Il giorno ven 17 lug 2020 alle ore 11:32 Robbie Gemmell <
robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> I expect this will be directly because of your sleeping for 1 second,
> using a low 'heartbeat' value of 1 second (which isn't necessarily
> doing exactly what you think, see later), coupled directly with your
> use of BlockingConnection.
>
> The BlockingConnection is a simplistic wrapper of sorts, it can't
> process anything at all if you aren't currently using its methods as
> it has no thread of its own to do so. This means it can't process the
> sending or receiving of heartbeats (or actual data instead of
> heartbeats). By sleeping for 1 second, you are ensuring that it did
> nothing for that second, and so by the point you use it and it can
> process any data, the peer will have seemingly exceeded the allowed
> timeout of 1 second without the connection getting data, whether it
> sent any or not.
>
> The 'heartbeat' setting controls the advertised idle-timeout. The
> value here appears to control the actual timeout at which the
> connection is considered broken, whilst the number advertised to the
> server will be half of this actual timeout to avoid spurious timeouts,
> i.e 1/2 sec in this case. If it's a proton[-j] based server it will
> also half the received value in case the sending peer had not done so,
> and so expect to send data or a heartbeat at 1/4 second period.
>
>
> Robbie
>
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 at 09:51, Francesco Raviglione
> <francescorav.es...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> > I'm trying to use a Blocking Connection in the python version of Qpid
> > Proton, in order to try to solve the problem of getting data from an
> > external source and sending it inside AMQP messages only when it is
> > available.
> > However, even if I explicitly set a low heartbeat value when creating a
> new
> > BlockingConnection(), I often get the following error:
> >
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> > File "ConnectionExceptionIssue.py", line 29, in <module>
> > AMQPsend("192.168.1.2:5672/topic://test.activemq.topic.001")
> > File "ConnectionExceptionIssue.py", line 27, in AMQPsend
> > sender.send(req);
> > File
> >
> "/home/fullsuper/anaconda3/envs/tornado-qpid/lib/python3.8/site-packages/proton/_utils.py",
> > line 119, in send
> > self.connection.wait(lambda: _is_settled(delivery), msg="Sending on
> > sender %s" % self.link.name,
> > File
> >
> "/home/fullsuper/anaconda3/envs/tornado-qpid/lib/python3.8/site-packages/proton/_utils.py",
> > line 486, in wait
> > raise ConnectionException(
> > proton._exceptions.ConnectionException: Connection amqp://
> 192.168.1.2:5672
> > disconnected: Condition('amqp:resource-limit-exceeded',
> 'local-idle-timeout
> > expired')
> >
> > To better analyze the problem, I tried writing this sample code:
> > https://pastebin.com/R8uJALAQ
> > The code should ideally send an "Hello World!" message every second to an
> > external broker.
> > I noticed that for higher heartbeat values (e.g. 7.5 seconds), the error
> > does not occur, while if I set a lower value (e.g. 1 second), I always
> get
> > this error.
> >
> > Do you know why? Is it some sort of bug or is there something wrong in my
> > sample code?
> >
> > Thank you very much,
> > Francesco Raviglione
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
