Actually, if you set the JMSListener to the appropriate cache level, it will not cache the consumer which means a consumer is created for every receive(). This allows for dynamically modifying the message selector which is used when a new consumer is created. There is a bit of overhead to do it this way, but it is probably better than creating an entirely new JMSListener for each async request. Perhaps this is a debateable issue.
You raise an interesting point regarding the use of a workqueue to handle the recieve() call for asynch situations. For each message sent in sendExchange(), a JMSTemplate is created to send message. Why isn't this same template object used for the recieve()? Currently on the trunk, the JMSTemplate is being used to receive synchronous responses. It could be just as easily used for asynch responses by putting template on workqueue and calling receive(). Doing it this way was would seem to do away with the necessity of having a JMSListener for the JMSConduit. This seems like it would make the JMSConduit code much simpler. ________________________________________ From: Willem Jiang [willem.ji...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 9:48 AM To: dev@cxf.apache.org Subject: Re: Support for using JMS MessageID as CorrelationID If the JMSListener is the Spring DefaultMessageListenerContainer, I doubt you can change the listener's message selector at the runtime. So I suggest to create a receive task with jms message selector to receive the response, and use a thread pool to run these receive task. Willem Seumas Soltysik wrote: > Hi Willem, > One more thing. With respect to using a workqueue I don't think it really > solves the issue. The JMSListener essentially already uses its own workqueue > to listen asynchronously for replies. The real issue is to minimize the > number of JMSListeners required to handle the asynch scenario. As opposed to > having a listener per thread, it would be better to have a pool of listeners > which could be allocated as individual threads make asych calls. A workqueue > is not going to help with this issue. > Regards, > Seumas > ________________________________________ > From: Willem Jiang [willem.ji...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 10:24 PM > To: dev@cxf.apache.org > Subject: Re: Support for using JMS MessageID as CorrelationID > > Hi Seumas, > > Please see my comments in the mail. > Seumas Soltysik wrote: >> I am trying to get support for using the JMS MessageID as the JMS >> CorrelationID as specified in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-2760 >> . After putting some work/thought into this issue, I became aware that this >> feature is available on the trunk but was not back-merged to the 2.1.x and >> 2.2.x branches. I am in the process of trying take what is done on trunk >> implement something similar on 2.1 and 2.2. However I have a couple of >> issues with the implementation on trunk that I want to sort out before >> back-porting. >> >> 1)There is no attribute in the clientConfig schema to specify that the user >> wants to use the MessageID in lieu of the CorrelationID. Currently the logic >> for deciding whether to use the MessageID instead of a generated >> CorrelationID looks like this: >> >> } else if (!jmsConfig.isSetConduitSelectorPrefix() >> && (exchange.isSynchronous() || exchange.isOneWay()) >> && (!jmsConfig.isSetUseConduitIdSelector() >> || !jmsConfig.isUseConduitIdSelector())) { >> messageIdPattern = true; >> >> This is quite a bit of mumbo-jumbo which could be sorted out by specifying a >> config attribute. > Yes, a simple config attribute could help us. > >> 2)There is a bit of code which seem left over from a previous implementation >> that has no value: >> >> if (exchange.isSynchronous()) { >> synchronized (exchange) { >> exchange.put(CORRELATED, Boolean.TRUE); >> exchange.notifyAll(); >> } >> } >> >> I don't see the current purpose of this as I don't see any code which has >> another thread waiting on the exchange mutex. >> > It's useless, >> 3)The biggest issue with the current implementation on the trunk is the fact >> that using the MessageID as CorrelationID is not supported for asynchronous >> calls. I don't know if this was purposeful or not but the MessageID as >> CorrelationID paradigm is only implemented for synchronous calls. Here is >> the source of the problem: >> >> if (!exchange.isOneWay()) { >> synchronized (exchange) { >> jmsTemplate.send(jmsConfig.getTargetDestination(), >> messageCreator); >> if (messageIdPattern) { >> correlationId = messageCreator.getMessageID(); >> } >> headers.setJMSMessageID(messageCreator.getMessageID()); >> >> final String messageSelector = "JMSCorrelationID = '" + >> correlationId + "'"; >> if (exchange.isSynchronous()) { >> javax.jms.Message replyMessage = >> jmsTemplate.receiveSelected(replyToDestination, >> >> messageSelector); >> if (replyMessage == null) { >> throw new RuntimeException("Timeout receiving >> message with correlationId " >> + correlationId); >> } else { >> doReplyMessage(exchange, replyMessage); >> } >> } >> } >> >> In this situation the MessageID is never put into the correlationMap for >> future correlation in onMessage(). Furthermore if the call is async, there >> is no JMSListener set up to receive the reply using a selector which selects >> for the CorrrelationID equal to the MessageID. So the JMSConduit will never >> receive the async callback. In order to support the async scenario, the >> JMSListener needs to dynamically set the MessageSelector after the message >> is sent and the MessageID is available. Furthermore, in a multi-threaded >> environment, there has to be one of these listeners per thread so that >> threads don't modify the same message selector when making concurrent calls. >> > I recalled we make the JMSConduit simple and also want to support the > messageIdPattern last summer, we changed the code like this and we don't > support the async call for the messageIdPattern. > > If you take a look at the first huge if condition checking again, you > can see that. > I don't like the way to implement the listener per thread to the async > call with the messageIdPattern by using the thread local, it looks a > litter mass. How about a using a work queue to take the response > receiving job ? > >> Feedback on these issues is appreciated so that I can move ahead with >> modifying trunk/2.2.x/2.1.x. >> >> Regards, >> Seumas >> >> >> >> >> > Willem > >
