I have a namespace in ASB with a single topic and subscription. I can see the message count from when I was testing the consumer (ruby client), the first spike, but after I stopped testing and nothing in the client was running there were 10 incoming requests from 'somewhere'. The second spike in the graph. The machine was off at this point so it must have come from Azure.
Within half an hour of turning on my machine there were 6 incoming requests, the third spike but nothing is running as it's a commandline client so I assume it's Azure again.
I don't have anything else in Azure (functions apps etc). Literally nothing is running/polling/pulling/peeking etc.
Is it possible to identify where these requests are coming from? Graph is below.
Incoming requests are not incoming messages. When there are no messaging and you receive nothing, there are still operations taking place. This is due to the fact that the client (assuming you're using client with a message handler rather than trying to retrieve messages yourself), the client is performing long-polling. I.e. the client will poll for new messages rather than the broker to push those. Unlike RabbitMQ, which will push to a client when messages become available.
Incoming Requests is a 'Request Metric' that shows number of requests made to the "Service Bus service" over a specified period. Even without any message flow within the ServiceBus Namespace there can be incoming requests.
Probably it is not possible to find the origin of the incoming request.
Related
We have a service which pings our EP1 Premium service and yesterday we received 3 client side timeout errors after 2 minutes of waiting. When opening the trace in App insights, these requests which time out are not even logged and have no trace of ever being received Azure side, and therefore stay unanswered. By looking at the metrics provided in the Azure Functions app, I found out that 1-2 minutes after the request has been sent, the app loses all its ability to work as its Total App Domains falls to 0 as well as all connections, threads and so on and this state lasts until the next request is received, therefore "skipping" the request that happened beforehand. This is a big issue as I need to make sure requests get answered in a timely manner.
The client service sent HTTP requests to the Azure Functions app expecting an answer, only to time out while the Azure-side doesn't have any record of ever receiving the request.
I believe this issues is related to Consumption Plan of Azure Functions called Cold Start behaviour. The "skipping" mechanism is explained below:
Apps may scale to zero when idle, meaning some requests may have additional latency at startup. The consumption plan does have some optimizations to help decrease cold start time, including pulling from pre-warmed placeholder functions that already have the function host and language processes running.https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-scale#cold-start-behavior
Please also consider of having look on this article, which explains the behaviour. https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/understanding-serverless-cold-start/
We use the REST service API to pull messages from a PubSub subscription. Messages ready to be serviced are acknowledged, leaving other messages unacknowledged to be serviced during a later execution cycle.
During an execution cycle, we send a single reqeust to the pull service REST API with returnImmediately=true and maxMessages=100.
While testing we encountered a situation when only 3 "old" messages would be returned during each execution cycle. Newly published messages were never included in the request to pull. We verified new messages were successfully arriving at the subscription by monitoring the Undelivered messages in Stackdriver monitoring.
Does the pull REST API not include all undelivered messages?
Does it ignore the maxMessages parameter?
How should all messages, up to the maximum specified, be read with the REST API?
Notes:
We worked around the problem by sending 2 parallel requests to the pull API and merging the results. We found the workaround (requiring parallel requests) discussed here.
Update Feb. 22, 2018
I wrote an article on our blog that explains why we forced to use the PubSub service REST API.
A single pull call will not necessarily return all undelivered messages, especially when returnImmediately is set to true. The pull promises to return at most maxMessages, it does not mean that it will always return maxMessages if there are that many messages available.
The pull API tries to balance returning more messages with keeping end-to-end latency low. It would rather return a few messages quickly than wait a long time to return more messages. Messages need to be retrieved from storage or from other servers and so sometimes all of those messages aren't immediately available to be delivered. A subsequent pull request would then receive other messages that were retrieved later.
If you want to maximize the chance of receiving more messages with a pull request, set returnImmediately to false. This still will not guarantee that messages will all be delivered in a single pull request, even if maxMessages is greater than the number of messages yet to be delivered. You should still send subsequent pull requests (or even more ideally, several pull requests at the same time) to retrieve all of the messages.
Alternatively, you should consider switching to the Google Cloud Pub/Sub client libraries, which handle all of this under the hood and deliver messages to a callback you specify as soon as they are available.
We are working on a scenario where user requests for generating some documents (through a web app) and these requests ( a message) are sent to azure service bus queue which when processed will result in generating a document.A user can make multiple requests for same document with updated data (which is part of the message) .What we need is that if there is a latest message from the user for the same document we take that message for generating document and other older messages can be ignored. User request can be identified using a unique identifier which potentially can be message id.
Is there a way currently in azure service bus queues to implement this.
To me this looks something exactly opposite of duplicate detection in queues.
Technically, you can use Peek / PeekBatch methods to read the entire queue (on each receive of the document request message), and if a newer message with the same request / document is detected, skip the older (current) one. However depending on an average number of messages in your queue, this can be very inefficient. In my experience PeekBatch is somewhat fast (seconds, up to tens of seconds for hundreds messages) - but scanning the entire queue again and again does not feel right. Alternatively, if you can, instead of processing document requests right away. Persist the requests somewhere else externally, outside of ASB. Then periodically scan that table, and execute only the latest one, and purge the rest.
If there are no longer any publishers or subscribers reading nor writing to a Queue, Topic, or Subscription, because of crashes or other abnormal terminations (instance restart, etc.), is that Queue/Topic/Subscription effectively orphaned?
I tested this by creating a few Queues, and then terminating the applications. Those Queues were still on the Service Bus a long time later. It seems that they will just stay there forever. That would be wonderful if we WANTED that behavior, but in this case, we do not.
How can we detect and delete these Queues, Topics, and Subscriptions? They will count towards Azure limits, etc, and we cannot have these orphaned processes every time an instance is restarted/patched/crashes.
If it helps make the question clearer, this is a unique situation in which the Queues/Topics/Subscriptions have special names, or special Filters, and a very limited set of publishers (1) and subscribers (1) for a limited time. This is not a case where we want survivability. These are instance-specific response channels. Whether we use Queues or Subscriptions is immaterial. If the instance is gone, so is the need for that Queue (or Subscription).
This is part of a solution where each web role has a dedicated response channel that it monitors. At any time, this web role may have dozens of requests pending via other messaging channels (Queues/Topics), and it is waiting for the answers on multiple threads. We need the response to come back to the thread that placed the message, so that the web role can respond to the caller. It is no good in this situation to simply have a Subscription based on the machine, because it will be receiving messages for other threads. We need each publishing thread to establish a dedicated response channel, so that the only thing on that channel is the response for that thread.
Even if we use Subscriptions (with some kind of instance-related filter) to do a long-polling receive operation on the Subscription, if the web role instance dies, that Subscription will be orphaned, correct?
This question can be boiled down like so:
If there are no more publishers or subscribers to a Queue/Topic/Subscription, then that service is effectively orphaned. How can those orphans be detected and cleaned up?
In this scenario you are looking for the Queue/Subscriptions to be "dynamic" in nature. They would be created and removed based on use as opposed to the current explicit provisioning model for these entities. Service Bus provides you with the APIs to perform create/delete operations so you can plug these on role OnStart/OnStop events appropriately. If those operations fail for some reason then the orphaned entities will exist. Again you can run clean up operation on them based on some unique identifier for the name of the entities. An example of this can be seen here: http://windowsazurecat.com/2011/08/how-to-simplify-scale-inter-role-communication-using-windows-azure-service-bus/
In the near future we will add more metadata and query capabilities to Queues/Topics/Subscriptions so you can see when they were last accessed and make cleanup decisions.
Service Bus Queues are built using the “brokered messaging” infrastructure designed to integrate applications or application components that may span multiple communication protocols, data contracts, trust domains, and/or network environments. The allows for a mechanism to communicate reliably with durable messaging.
If a client (publisher) sends a message to a service bus queue and then crashes the message will be stored on the Queue until as consumer reads the message off the queue. Also if your consumer dies and restarts it will just poll the queue and pick up any work that is waiting for it (You can scale out and have multiple consumers reading from queue to increase throughput), Service Bus Queues allow you to decouple your applications via durable cloud gateway analogous to MSMQ on-premises (or other queuing technology).
What I'm really trying to say is that you won't get an orphaned queue, you might get poisoned messages that you will need to handled, this blog post gives some very detailed information re: Service Bus Queues and their Capacity and Quotas which might give you a better understanding http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windowsazure/hh767287.aspx
Re: Queue Management, you can do this via Visual Studio (1.7 SDK & Tools) or there is an excellent tool called Service Bus Explorer that will make your life easier for queue managagment: http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsazure/Service-Bus-Explorer-f2abca5a
*Note the default maximum number of queues is 10,000 (per service namespace, this can be increased via a support call)
As Abhishek Lai mentioned there is no orphan detecting capability supported.
Orphan detection can be implement externally in multiple ways.
For example, whenever you send/receive a message, update a timestamp in an SQL database to indicate that the queue/tropic/subscription is still active. This timestamp can then be used to determine orphans.
If your process will crash which is very much possible there will be issue with the message delivery within the queue however queue will still be available to process your request. Handling Application Crashes and Unreadable Messages with Windows Azure Service Bus queues are described here:
The Service Bus provides functionality to help you gracefully recover from errors in your application or difficulties processing a message. If a receiver application is unable to process the message for some reason, then it can call the Abandon method on the received message (instead of the Complete method). This will cause the Service Bus to unlock the message within the queue and make it available to be received again, either by the same consuming application or by another consuming application.
In the event that the application crashes after processing the message but before the Complete request is issued, then the message will be redelivered to the application when it restarts. This is often called At Least Once Processing, that is, each message will be processed at least once but in certain situations the same message may be redelivered. If the scenario cannot tolerate duplicate processing, then application developers should add additional logic to their application to handle duplicate message delivery. This is often achieved using the MessageId property of the message, which will remain constant across delivery attempts.
If there are no longer any processes reading nor writing to a queue, because of crashes or other abnormal terminations (instance restart, etc.), is that queue effectively orphaned?
No the queue is in place to allow communication to occur via Brokered Messages, if all your apps die for some reason then the queue still exists and will be there when they become alive again, it's the communication channel for loosely decoupled applications. Regards Billing 'Messages are charged based on the number of messages sent to, or delivered by, the Service Bus during the billing month' you won't be charged if a queue exists but nobody is using it.
I tested this by creating a few queues, and then terminating the
applications. Those queues were still on the machine a long time
later.
The whole point of the queue is to guarantee message delivery of loosely decoupled applications. Think of the queue as an entity or application in its own right with high availability (SLA) as its hosted in Azure, your producer/consumers can die/restart and the queue will be active in Azure. *Note I got a bit confused with your wording re: "still on the machine a long time later", the queue doesn't actually live on your machine, it sits up in Azure in a designated service bus namespace. You can view and managed the queues via the tools I pointed out in the previous answer.
How can we detect and delete these queues, as they will count towards
Azure limits, etc.
As stated above the default maximum number of queues is 10,000 (per service namespace, this can be increased via a support call), queue management can be done via the tools stated in the other answer. You should only be looking to delete queue's when you no longer have producer/consumers looking to write to them (i.e. never again). You can of course create and delete queues in your producer/consumer applications via the namespaceManager.QueueExists, more information here How to Use Service Bus Queues
If it helps make the question clearer, this is a unique situation in which the queues have special names, and a very limited set of publishers (1) and subscribers (1) for a limited time.
It sounds like you need to use Topics & Subscriptions How to Use Service Bus Topics/Subscriptions, this link also has a section on 'How to Delete Topics and Subscriptions' If you have a very limited lifetime then you could handle topic creation/deletion in your app's otherwise you could have have a separate Queue/Topic/Subscription setup/deletion script to handle this logic...
When a Web Role places a message onto a Storage Queue, how can it poll for a specific, correlated response? I would like the back-end Worker Role to place a message onto a response queue, with the intent being that the caller would pick the response up and go from there.
Our intent is to leverage the Queue in order to offload some heavy processing onto the back-end Worker Roles in order to ensure high performance on the Web Roles. However, we do not wish to respond to the HTTP requests until the back-end Workers are finished and have responded.
I am actually in the middle of making a similar decision. In my case i have a WCF service running in a web role which should off-load calculations to worker-roles. When the result has been computed, the web role will return the answer to the client.
My basic data structure knowledge tells me that i should avoid using something that is designed as a queue in a non-queue way. That means a queue should always be serviced in a FIFO like manner. So basically if using queues for both requests and response, the threads awaiting to return data to the client will have to wait untill the calculation message is at the "top" of the response queue, which is not optimal. If storing the responses by using Azure tables, the threads poll for messages creating unnecessary overhead
What i belive is a possible solution to this problem is using a queue for the requests. This enables use of the competeing consumers pattern and thereby load-balancing. On messages sent into this queue you set the correlationId property on the message. For reply the pub/sub part ("topics") part of Azure service bus is used togehter with a correlation filter. When your back-end has processed the request, it published a result to a "responseSubject" with the correlationId given in the original request. Now this response ca be retrieved by your client by calling CreateSubscribtion (Sorry, i can't post more than two links apparently, google it) using that correlation filter, and it should get notified when the answer is published. Notice that the CreateSubscribtion part should just be done one time in the OnStart method. Then you can do an async BeginRecieve on that subscribtion and the role will be notified in the given callback when a response for one of it's request is available. The correlationId will tell you which request the response is for. So your last challenge is giving this response back to the thread holding the client connection.
This could be achieved by creating Dictionary with the correlationId's (probably GUID's) as key and responses as value. When your web role gets a request it creates the guid, set it as correlationId, add it the hashset, fire the message to the queue and then call Monitor.Wait() on the Guid object. Then have the recieve method invoked by the topic subscribition add the response to the dictionary and then call Monitor.Notify() on that same guid object. This awakens your original request-thread and you can now return the answer to your client (Or something. Basically you just want your thread to sleep and not consume any ressources while waiting)
The queues on the Azure Service Bus have a lot more capabilities and paradigms including pub / sub capabilities which can address issues dealing with queue servicing across multiple instance.
One approach with pub / sub, is to have one queue for requests and one for the responses. Each requesting instance would also subscribe to the response queue with a filter on the header such that it would only receive the responses targeted for it. The request message would, of course contain the value to the placed in the response header to drive the filter.
For the Service Bus based solution there are samples available for implementing Request/Response pattern with Queues and Topics (pub-sub)
Let worker role keep polling and processing the message. As soon as the message is processed add an entry in Table storage with the required corelationId(RowKey) and the processing result, before deleting the processed message from the queue.
Then WebRoles just need to do a look up of the Table with the desired correlationId(RowKey) & PartitionKey
Have a look at using SignalR between the worker role and the browser client. So your web role puts a message on the queue and returns a result to the browser (something simple like 'waiting...') and hook it up to the worker role with SignalR. That way your web role carries on doing other stuff and doesn't have to wait for a result from asynchronous processing, only the browser needs to.
There is nothing intrinsic to Windows Azure queues that does what you are asking. However, you could build this yourself fairly easily. Include a message ID (GUID) in your push to the queue and when processing is complete, have the worker push a new message with that message ID into a response channel queue. Your web app can poll this queue to determine when processing is completed for a given command.
We have done something similar and are looking to use something like SignalR to help reply back to the client when commands are completed.