Hi Fred Sorry I'm late on that. I'm back there to help you.
The closing looks weird to me. Remember that Session should be on a single thread (the Connection can be shared across multiple threads, but the Session should be squared to a single thread). I suspect something weird around that. I will try to keep a deeper look as soon as I have the ActiveMQ releases (6.1.1 and 5.18.4) on vote. Regards JB On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 4:34 PM Frédéric Curvat <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Matt, > Let's continue on github, and let's use the mailing list for a recap later. > Best, > Fred > > Le mer. 20 mars 2024 à 16:21, Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > Hi Frédéric- > > > > A sample project is a big help. First step is to tidy up the dependencies > > and align with Jakarta-based namespace. Using ActiveMQ 6.1.0 instead is the > > best next step. > > > > I opened a GH issue on your poc repo where other discussions could happen > > with less async conversation between your code tree and this mailing list. > > > > Summary for future lurkers of this email thread: > > > > Spring Boot 3.x is based on Jakarta vs Java EE. Basically, it means you > > need to change your POC to use: > > > > import jakarta.jms. .. > > > > instead of > > > > import javax.jms .. > > > > Let’s get that all cleaned up and aligned properly before looking further > > at any other issues. > > > > Thanks! > > Matt Pavlovich > > > > > On Mar 20, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Frédéric Curvat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > Here is a poc : https://github.com/fcurvat/amqpoc > > > > > > Just start an activemq broker (5.18.3) run the class 'PocAmqApplication' > > > spring boot app and stop it gracefully (app generate 1000 messages at > > start > > > / got 5 consumers with prefetch 100). > > > Class 'ShutdownEventSource' allow to hook and stop gracefully the amq > > > consumers. > > > > > > Often I get one message that is not ack (checking the amq console on > > > http://localhost:8161/admin/queues.jsp). > > > Sometimes it takes some time to shutdown because one consumer is still > > > consuming for a minute or more (that's not the big issue for me, as we > > can > > > manage to set a bigger 'terminationGracePeriodSeconds' on kubernetes to > > let > > > the app stop). > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Fred > > > > > > Le mar. 19 mars 2024 à 17:35, Frédéric Curvat <[email protected]> a > > écrit : > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> I will work on setting up a simple project, for now that's tangled with > > >> our code. > > >> > > >> Fred > > >> > > >> Le mar. 19 mars 2024 à 17:09, Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]> a > > >> écrit : > > >> > > >>> Hi Frédéric- > > >>> > > >>> Do you have a small sample project that is able to reproduce the issue > > >>> that you can share (preferably a simple GitHub project)? > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> Matt Pavlovich > > >>> > > >>>> On Mar 19, 2024, at 10:47 AM, Frédéric Curvat <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> > > 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 <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > >
