Hello, Checking back on the case, i played with shutdown of consumers (and not using brave instrumentation). With 5 consumers reading, if i close consumers, then sessions, then connection, i almost always only ack on 4 messages despite 5 messages are read. I almost always get one error of this kind :
java.lang.NullPointerException: Cannot invoke "java.util.List.get(int)" because "this.synchronizations" is null at org.apache.activemq.TransactionContext.afterRollback(TransactionContext.java:168) ~[activemq-client-5.18.3.jar:5.18.3] at org.apache.activemq.TransactionContext.rollback(TransactionContext.java:291) ~[activemq-client-5.18.3.jar:5.18.3] at org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQSession.rollback(ActiveMQSession.java:606) ~[activemq-client-5.18.3.jar:5.18.3] at org.apache.activemq.jms.pool.PooledSession.close(PooledSession.java:118) ~[activemq-jms-pool-5.18.3.jar:5.18.3] I got the same error if close the connection first (because the connection cleans up the sessions). I wonder if that's a bug or other misusage on our side. Client version is 5.18.3 Any help / thoughts welcome :) Best, Fred Le lun. 11 mars 2024 à 16:27, Frédéric Curvat <fcur...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Hello, > > More news about our issue. > > We did check again the case and i have some news : > - Nothing bad in broker logs (no poison ack). > - Application logs shows that issue appears on graceful shutdown of the > application (however not on all shutdowns) > > Our shutdown consists in calling .close() method on all MessageConsumers > and then call .close() on all Sessions. > Seems fair to do it like this but reading the javadoc seems we could have > just called .close() on the Connection. > > We checked a couple of issues of reading : > - In one case, we saw the stacktrace below, all consumers .close() are ok > but one session is failing to close properly. > - In the other case, all consumers and sessions are closed without errors. > > ====== > java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException: Index 1 out of bounds for length 1 > at > java.base/jdk.internal.util.Preconditions.outOfBounds(Preconditions.java:64) > at > java.base/jdk.internal.util.Preconditions.outOfBoundsCheckIndex(Preconditions.java:70) > at > java.base/jdk.internal.util.Preconditions.checkIndex(Preconditions.java:266) > at java.base/java.util.Objects.checkIndex(Objects.java:361) > at java.base/java.util.ArrayList.get(ArrayList.java:427) > at > org.apache.activemq.TransactionContext.afterRollback(TransactionContext.java:168) > at > org.apache.activemq.TransactionContext.rollback(TransactionContext.java:291) > at org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQSession.rollback(ActiveMQSession.java:606) > at > org.talend.ipaas.rt.amqsource.tracing.micrometer.MicrometerSession.rollback(MicrometerSession.java:102) > at brave.jms.TracingSession.rollback(TracingSession.java:119) > at org.apache.activemq.jms.pool.PooledSession.close(PooledSession.java:118) > at > org.talend.ipaas.rt.amqsource.impl.AMQEventSourceEngine.unregisterAllEventCallbacks(AMQEventSourceEngine.java:297) > at > org.talend.ipaas.rt.amqsource.impl.AMQEventSourceEngine.unbindAll(AMQEventSourceEngine.java:203) > at > org.talend.ipaas.rt.springboot.common.shutdown.ShutdownEventSource.onApplicationEvent(ShutdownEventSource.java:38) > at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native > Method) > at > java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:77) > at > java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) > at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:568) > at > org.springframework.context.event.ApplicationListenerMethodAdapter.doInvoke(ApplicationListenerMethodAdapter.java:343) > at > org.springframework.context.event.ApplicationListenerMethodAdapter.processEvent(ApplicationListenerMethodAdapter.java:228) > at > org.springframework.context.event.ApplicationListenerMethodAdapter.onApplicationEvent(ApplicationListenerMethodAdapter.java:165) > at > org.springframework.context.event.SimpleApplicationEventMulticaster.doInvokeListener(SimpleApplicationEventMulticaster.java:172) > at > org.springframework.context.event.SimpleApplicationEventMulticaster.invokeListener(SimpleApplicationEventMulticaster.java:165) > at > org.springframework.context.event.SimpleApplicationEventMulticaster.multicastEvent(SimpleApplicationEventMulticaster.java:143) > at > org.springframework.context.support.AbstractApplicationContext.publishEvent(AbstractApplicationContext.java:437) > at > org.springframework.context.support.AbstractApplicationContext.publishEvent(AbstractApplicationContext.java:370) > at > org.springframework.context.support.AbstractApplicationContext.doClose(AbstractApplicationContext.java:1058) > at > org.springframework.boot.web.servlet.context.ServletWebServerApplicationContext.doClose(ServletWebServerApplicationContext.java:173) > at > org.springframework.context.support.AbstractApplicationContext.close(AbstractApplicationContext.java:1026) > at > org.springframework.boot.SpringApplicationShutdownHook.closeAndWait(SpringApplicationShutdownHook.java:139) > at java.base/java.lang.Iterable.forEach(Iterable.java:75) > at > org.springframework.boot.SpringApplicationShutdownHook.run(SpringApplicationShutdownHook.java:108) > at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) > ==== > > More specifically > > at > org.apache.activemq.TransactionContext.afterRollback(TransactionContext.java:168) > > at > org.apache.activemq.TransactionContext.rollback(TransactionContext.java:291) > > at org.apache.activemq.ActiveMQSession.rollback(ActiveMQSession.java:606) > > at > org.talend.ipaas.rt.amqsource.tracing.micrometer.MicrometerSession.rollback(MicrometerSession.java:102) > > at brave.jms.TracingSession.rollback(TracingSession.java:119) > > at > org.apache.activemq.jms.pool.PooledSession.close(PooledSession.java:118) > I wonder if that's not the brave implementation that triggers the rollback > of the message reading. That would explain that the message is finally read > by another consumer. > I don't know if there is a regression there in brave tracing (or if it is > silently failling for some time), but we are using this tracing for quite > some time (and we are not idempotent if replaying the message). > > We will dig on the possible brave changes, but still any comment or > thoughts are welcome. > > Best, > > Fred > > Le lun. 4 mars 2024 à 10:04, Frédéric Curvat <fcur...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> Hello JB ! >> >> Hope you are well ! >> >> >1. The message goes in redelivery (because it expired or client >> >rollback transaction) and so it can be taken by another consumer. As >> >you use session_transacted, the "first" client has to deal with the >> >rollback >> For me that was not so likely because the message are read with a 1 >> second interval on two different service pods. How could i confirm that ? >> Also logging the messageId would help right ? >> >> >2. Do you see "poison ack" in the log ? >> No trace in logs but we will double check. >> >> >Oh by the way, what's your consumer prefetch ? I guess it's more than 1 ? >> Yes, we use prefetch to 100 (over tcp openwire). >> >> Thanks for support ! i am off this week but probably i will ping you >> directly in coming weeks since you proposed it. >> >> Best, >> >> Fred >> >> Le lun. 4 mars 2024 à 07:28, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> a >> écrit : >> >>> Oh by the way, what's your consumer prefetch ? I guess it's more than 1 ? >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 4:52 PM Frédéric Curvat <fcur...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hello ! >>> > >>> > At my company we are using Apache ActiveMQ 5.18.3. >>> > We suspect that in some rare cases, a queue message is read twice by >>> > different consumers. >>> > For more context : >>> > - broker is classic primary/secondary (secondary started but not >>> active - >>> > not a network of brokers). >>> > - we are using persisted queues with PostgreSQL backend. >>> > - A single queue is being read by several consumers : 10 consumers for >>> a >>> > single java app deployed in HA other several k8s pods. >>> > - We use SESSION_TRANSACTED session for either consumers and producers. >>> > - We use PooledConnectionFactory with 1 connection, >>> > maximumActiveSessionPerConnection 500, expiryTimeout 10000 >>> > We see no transaction or other error in logs, either service of >>> activemq >>> > broker at the time of the "double read". >>> > >>> > Has something like this already been seen ? Can it be a bug or a >>> > misconfiguration somewhere ? >>> > >>> > Best, >>> > >>> > Fred >>> >>
