I'm trying to get my head around MassTransit in combination with RabbitMQ.
The basic concepts are working in a test project, but what I need is the following:
My system will have one or more servers that react to real life events (telephony). These events wil, by means of MassTransit and RabbitMQ, translate into messages that will be picked up by one or more receivers via a separate server, set up as RabbitMQ host. So far so good.
However, I cannot assume that I always have a connection between the publisher and the host machines. Just assume that the publishing server will continue to consume the real life events, but now cannot publish it's messages.
So, the question is: Does MassTransit have some kind of mechanism to store messages locally some way until the connection is re-established?
Or should I install RabbitMQ on every publishing server as well, in order to create a local exchange? Then I have to make the exchanges synchronize themselves after a reconnect.
Probably you have to implement a store and forward policy. Instead of publishing directly your message through MassTransit and RabbitMQ, you can store the message in a persistence repository (a local database) and delegate to some other process the notification through Masstransit of the messages stored before. This approach is often referred as "Client High Availability". This does not substitute the standard HA (High Availability) on server like the one implemented by RabbitMQ. But it's a good approach to use in a distributed system (like the one you described) because it could help you a lot in scenarios of server failure (e.g. an issue on RabbitMQ server that causes some loss of messages that you still have inside the store of some client and therefore you can make it process again).
Related
So i currently have a chat system running NodeJS that passes messages via rabbit and each connected user has their own unique queue that subscribed and only listening to messages (for only them). The backend can also use this chat pipeline to communicate other system messages like notifications/friend requests and other user event driven information.
Currently the backend would have to loop and publish each message 1 by 1 per user even if the payload of the message is the same for let's say 1000 users. I would like to get away from that and be able to send the same message to multiple different users but not EVERY user who's connected.
(example : notifying certain users their friend has come online).
I considered implementing a rabbit queue system where all messages are pooled into the same queue and instead of rabbit sending all user queues node takes these messages and emit's the message to the appropriate user via socket connections (to whoever is online).
Proposed - infrastructure
This way the backend does not need to loop for 100s and 1000s of users and can send a single payload containing all users this message should go to. I do plan to cluster the nodejs servers together.
I was also wondering since ive never done this in a production environment, will i need to track each socketID.
Potential pitfalls i've identified so far:
slower since 1000s of messages can pile up in a single queue.
manually storing socket IDs to manually trasmit to users.
offloading routing to NodeJS instead of RabbitMQ
Has anyone done anything like this before? If so, what are your recommendations. Is it better to scale with user unique queues, or pool all grouped messages for all users into smaller (but larger pools) of queues.
as a general rule, queue-per-user is an anti-pattern. there are some valid uses of this, but i've never seen it be a good idea for a chat app (in spite of all the demos that use this example)
RabbitMQ can be a great tool for facilitating the delivery of messages between systems, but it shouldn't be used to push messages to users.
I considered implementing a rabbit queue system where all messages are pooled into the same queue and instead of rabbit sending all user queues node takes these messages and emit's the message to the appropriate user via socket connections (to whoever is online).
this is heading down the right direction, but you have to remember that RabbitMQ is not a database (see previous link, again).
you can't randomly seek specific messages that are sitting in the queue and then leave them there. they are first in, first out.
in a chat app, i would have rabbitmq handling the message delivery between your systems, but not involved in delivery to the user.
your thoughts on using web sockets are going to be the direction you want to head for this. either that, or Server Sent Events.
if you need persistence of messages (history, search, last-viewed location, etc) then use a database for that. keep a timestamp or other marker of where the user left off, and push messages to them starting at that spot.
you're concerns about tracking sockets for the users are definitely something to think about.
if you have multiple instances of your node server running sockets with different users connected, you'll need a way to know which users are connected to which node server.
this may be a good use case for rabbitmq - but not in a queue-per-user manner. rather, in a binding-per-user. you could have each node server create a queue to receive messages from the exchange where messages are published. the node server would then create a binding between the exchange and queue based on the user id that is logged in to that particular node server
this could lead to an overwhelming number of bindings in rmq, though.
you may need a more intelligent method of tracking which server has which users connected, or just ignore that entirely and broadcast every message to every node server. in that case, each server would publish an event through the websocket based on the who the message should be delivered to.
if you're using a smart enough websocket library, it will only send the message to the people that need it. socket.io did this, i know, and i'm sure other websocket libraries are smart like this, as well.
...
I probably haven't given you a concrete answer to your situation, and I'm sure you have a lot more context to consider. hopefully this will get you down the right path, though.
I am building a web app which has two parts. In one part it uses a real time connection between the server and the client and in the other part it does some cpu intensive task to provide relevant data.
Implementing the real time communication in nodejs and the cpu intensive part in python/java. What is the best way the nodejs server can participate in a duplex communication with the other server ?
For a basic solution you can use Socket.IO if you are already using it and know how it works, it will get the job done since it allows for communication between a client and server where the client can be a different server in a different language.
If you want a more robust solution with additional options and controls or which can handle higher traffic throughput (though this shouldn't be an issue if you are ultimately just sending it through the relatively slow internet) you can look at something like ØMQ (ZeroMQ). It is a messaging queue which gives you more control and lots of different communications methods beyond just request-response.
When you set either up I would recommend using your CPU intensive server as the stable end(server) and your web server(s) as your client. Assuming that you are using a single server for your CPU intensive tasks and you are running several NodeJS server instances to take advantage of multi-cores for your web server. This simplifies your communication since you want to have a single point to connect to.
If you foresee needing multiple CPU servers you will want to setup a routing server that can route between multiple web servers and multiple CPU servers and in this case I would recommend the extra work of learning ØMQ.
You can use http.request method provided to make curl request within node's code.
http.request method is also used for implementing Authentication api.
You can put your callback in the success of request and when you get the response data in node, you can send it back to user.
While in backgrount java/python server can utilize node's request for CPU intensive task.
I maintain a node.js application that intercommunicates among 34 tasks spread across 2 servers.
In your case, for communication between the web server and the app server you might consider mqtt.
I use mqtt for this kind of communication. There are mqtt clients for most languages, including node/javascript, python and java. In my case I publish json messages using mqtt 'topics' and any task that has registered to subscribe to a 'topic' receives it's data when published. If you google "pub sub", "mqtt" and "mosquitto" you'll find lots of references and examples. Mosquitto (now an Eclipse project) is only one of a number of mqtt brokers that are available. Another very good broker that is written in Java is called hivemq.
This is a very simple, reliable solution that scales well. In my case literally millions of messages reliably pass through mqtt every day.
You must be looking for socketio
Socket.IO enables real-time bidirectional event-based communication.
It works on every platform, browser or device, focusing equally on reliability and speed.
Sockets have traditionally been the solution around which most
realtime systems are architected, providing a bi-directional
communication channel between a client and a server.
I am building an app with several Node.js instances as a Backend (http server, socket server and several a pool of domain servers). Now I am trying to cover several communication and configuration aspects and am wondering if redis makes an appropriate solution.
So, I would use it for the following purposes:
Implementation of a shared run-time lookup table. It's a table of several hundreds of relativelly simple records, accessed and manipulated by 2 node-instances.
Implementation of message queues. Each domain server receives commands from the http server and should execute them sequentially. Domain server should be able to listen on a redis-event, and execute each new command upon its arival
socket sever also has a regis message queue and listen to its event, in order to push notification to connected clients
Is redis "too heavy" for such a purpose?
Does it offer all needed functionality?
I can definitelly implement a look-up in a file and/or memory and a queue using sockets. However, it might make a code cleaner and a solution more robust with redis.
Redis is definitely not a heavy solution, on the contrary.
It's small, insanely fast (when using pipelining), easy to deploy. I consider it as a light solution, a kind of swiss knife that may solves many problems.
Redis based message queues are OK if you don't expect any guarantee on the message delivery. That is to say Redis based queues can't assure you the client has received the message. If it's a problem for your application you should consider using an heavier solution, like 0mq or Rabbitmq.
I'm using Backbone.iobind to bind my client Backbone models over socket.io to the back-end server which in turn store it all to MongoDB.
I'm using socket.io so I can synchronize changes back to other clients Backbone models.
The problems starts when I try to run the same thing over a cluster of node.js servers.
Setting a session store was easy using connect-mongo which stores the session to MongoDB.
But now I can't inform all the clients on every change, since the clients are distributed between the different node.js servers.
The only solution I found is to set a pub/sub queue between the different node.js servers (e.g. mubsub), which seems like a very heavy weight solution that will trigger an event on all the servers for every change.
How did you reach the conclusion that pub/sub is a "very heavy weight solution"?
Sounds like you got it right up until that part :-)
Oh, and pub/sub is not a queue.
Let's examine that claim:
The nice thing about pub/sub is that you publish and subscribe to channels/topics.
So, using the classic chat server example, let's say you have a million users connected in total, but #myroom only has 50 users in it.
When a message is sent to #myroom, it's being published once. No duplication whatsoever.
In most use-cases you won't even need to store it on disk/RAM, so we're mostly looking at network/bandwidth here. And, I mean, you're probably throwing more data (probably over the wire?) to MongoDB already, so I assume that's not your bottleneck.
If you also use socket.io's rooms features (which is basically its own pub/sub mechanism), that means only 5 users will have that message emitted to them over the websocket.
And no, socket.io won't iterate over 1M clients to find out which of them are in room #myroom ;-)
So the message is published once, each subscriber (node.js instance) will get notified once, and only the relevant clients -- socket.io won't waste CPU cycles in order to find them as it keeps track of them when they join() or leave() a room -- will receive the message.
Doesn't that sound pretty efficient and light-weight?
Give Redis a shot.
It's really simple to set-up, runs entirely in memory, blazing-fast, replication is extremely simple, etc.
That's the way socket.io recommends passing events between nodes.
You can find more information/code here.
Additionally, if MongoDB can't handle the load at any point, you can use Redis as your session-store as well.
Hope this helps!
I have an Azure hosted application (iisnode) that accepts direct connections from multiple client services. This application streams data between the various connections. If running on a system with multiple instances of node.js, the actual TCP connections will be connecting to different instances.
Is there a way to somehow "move" or "share" the in-memory connection from one instance to another?
Sure, I could build some inter-instance communication to route data, but I don't think the application will scale since it's entire purpose is to move data around quickly. For example, I would have 4 instances, 100 connections to each, and I would spend as many resources moving the data between instances as I would spend moving the data between the client connections.
When you configure iisnode to create more than one node.exe process (using the nodeProcessCountPerApplication setting), it will dispatch incoming HTTP requests between them using a round robin logic; the application has no control over that behavior. Given your scenario there is no way to deterministically ensure that the requests ("connections") from two distinct clients will be colocated in the same node.exe process.
There is no mechanism to "move" an existing TCP connection or HTTP request between node.exe processes.
In general a better way to address such a notification scenario may be to use a subscription-based messaging infrastructure as your backend. ServiceBus in Azure provides such mechanisms. In this design, each instance of node.exe would subscribe to a particular topic when it receives a connection from the client, and be notified by ServiceBus when a matching notification arrives, possibly via a different instance of node.exe.