QSF is so convenient, let's take a look at a demo of using QSF to send and
receive messages:
//receive message
@QSFProvider(consumerId = "rocketmq_consumer_qsf_demo", topic =
"rocketmq_topic_qsf_demo")
@Slf4j
public class QSFDemoServiceImpl implements QSFDemoService {
@Override
public void testQSFBasic(long id, String name) {
log.info("in service call: syncVoid id:{} name:{}", id, name);
}
@Override
public void testQSFIdempotency(long id, String name) {
log.info("in service call: asyncEcho id:{} name:{}", id, name);
}
}
//send message
@RestController
@RequestMapping("/demo")
@Slf4j
public class TestController {
@QSFConsumer(topic = "rocketmq_topic_qsf_demo", methodSpecials = {
@QSFConsumer.ConsumerMethodSpecial(methodName = "asyncEcho", idempotent
= true)
})
private QSFDemoService qsfDemoService;
@GetMapping(("/qsf"))
public Map<String, String> qsf(HttpServletRequest request) {
Map<String, String> resultMap = new HashMap<>();
// test QSF basic usage
qsfDemoService.testQSFBasic(100L, "hello world");
// test QSF idempotency, method with same parameters will be invoked
exactly once
qsfDemoService.testQSFIdempotency(100L, "hello world");
qsfDemoService.testQSFIdempotency(100L, "hello world");
return resultMap;
}
}
QSF API is non-intrusive, requires minimal information provided by users, and
minimizes the chance of making mistakes. It is as convenient to use as method
calls, with low development and testing costs, and with QSF team
communication is simpler.
?????????????????? ???????? ??????????????????
??????:
??Jason.Chen??
chenhua...@foxmail.com;
????????: 2022??3??16??(??????) ????9:39
??????: ??dev??dev@rocketmq.apache.org;
????: ?????? [DISCUSS] RIP-35 queue service framework(QSF)
Thanks Reply:)
QSF is a step further than rocketmq-spring. Using QSF, users can get the most
intuitive experience that is almost identical to that of local method calls;
moreover, QSF reserves a good extension capability, which can easily provide
features such as idempotent, eventual consistency and flow control and so on.
For a simple usage example of QSF, please see the discussion above :)
?????????????????? ???????? ??????????????????
??????:
??dev??
duhengfore...@apache.org;
????????: 2022??3??16??(??????) ????8:44
??????: ??dev??dev@rocketmq.apache.org;
????: Re: [DISCUSS] RIP-35 queue service framework(QSF)
Nice to see this proposal of yours, but it seems a bit like what
rocketmq-spring[1] does, so can you elaborate on the difference between QSF
and rocketmq-spring?
[1]https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-spring
yukon yu...@apache.org ??2022??3??16?????? 20:23??????
Could you please provide some demos to show how we use
QSFProducer/Consumer?
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 6:49 PM Jason.Chen chenhua...@foxmail.com wrote:
I am sorry that the RIP mail format is incorrect, and i write a
well-formed google doc version here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10wSe24TAls7J9y0Ql4MYo73FX8g1aX9guoxBxzQhJgg
RIP 35 queue service framework(QSF)
Status
?? Current State: Proposed
?? Authors: booom( booom (jason) ?? GitHub)
?? Shepherds: yukon( zhouxinyu (yukon) ?? GitHub)
?? Mailing List discussion: dev@rocketmq.apache.org
?? Pull Request:
?? Released:
Background & Motivation
What do we need to do
?? Will we add a new module? Yes.
?? Will we add new APIs? No.
?? Will we add new feature? Yes.
Why should we do that
?? Are there any problems of our current project?
The current mq client API is intrusive, to send message or consume
message, we should code to manage the mq infrastructure, and mixed it up
with our business logic codes.
?? What can we benefit proposed changes?
Encapsulate mq client API to support method invoking style usage.
The encapsulation is easily extensible, to support
idempotence/eventually consistent/ fluid control extensions and so on.
Isolate the mq client manage code and the business logic code, to
help mq users improve their systems?? maintainability.
Goals
?? What problem is this proposal designed to solve?
Unobtrusive mq client usage, and easily extensible to support
idempotence/eventually consistent/ fluid control extensions and so on.
?? To what degree should we solve the problem?
100%.
Non-Goals
?? What problem is this proposal NOT designed to solve?
Add new features to classics mq client.
Affect compatibility.
?? Are there any limits of this proposal?
Only QSF(queue service framework) users will benefit.
Changes
Architecture
To simplify a process, we need to consider what information is essential
and must be provided by users to execute this process? How to properly
organize this information so that it is most user-friendly?
Along this thinking path, we have extracted the necessary parameters for
mq calls and organized them into the java annotations @QSFConsumer and
@QSFProvider. After that, through the extension support of spring
container
in each stage of bean life cycle, we can process @QSFConsumer
@QSFProvider
annotation in BeanPostProcessor, extract method invocation information to
method invocation information object MethodInvokeInfo and send it out,
and
locate it through MethodInvokeInfo at the message receiving endpoint. The
bean where the call is made, the method where it is located, the
parameters
used, and then the method is called by reflection.
Interface Design/Change
?? Method signature changes
?? method name
?? parameter list
?? return value
Nothing.
?? Method behavior changes
Nothing.
?? CLI command changes
Nothing.
?? Log format or content changes
Nothing.
Compatibility, Deprecation, and Migration Plan
?? Are backward and forward compatibility taken into
consideration?
Yes.
?? Are there deprecated APIs?
Nothing.
?? How do we do migration?
Upgrade normally, no additional migration required.
Implementation Outline
We will implement the proposed changes by 1 phase. (QSF is implemented
and
works well in our project)
Phase 1
Complete the QSF mq client encapsulation.
Complete the QSF idempotency support
Rejected Alternatives
There are no other alternatives.
?????????????????? ???????? ??????????????????
??????:
??Jason.Chen??
<
chenhua...@foxmail.com>;
????????: 2022??3??16??(??????) ????12:55
??????: ??dev??<dev@rocketmq.apache.org>;
????: [DISCUSS] RIP-35 queue service framework(QSF)
Status
?? Current State: Proposed
?? Authors: booom( booom (jason) ?? GitHub)
?? Shepherds: yukon( zhouxinyu (yukon) ?? GitHub)
?? Mailing List discussion:
dev@rocketmq.apache.org
?? Pull Request:
?? Released: <relased_version>
Background & Motivation
What do we need to do
?? Will we add a new module? Yes.
?? Will we add new APIs? No.
?? Will we add new feature? Yes.
Why should we do that
?? Are there any problems of our current project?
The current mq client API is intrusive, to send message or consume
message, we should code to manage the mq infrastructure, and mixed it up
with our business logic codes.
?? What can we benefit proposed changes?
1. Encapsulate mq client API to support method
invoking
style usage.
2. The encapsulation is easily extensible, to support
idempotence/eventually consistent/ fluid control extensions and so on.
3. Isolate the mq client manage code and the business
logic code, to help mq users improve their systems?? maintainability.
Goals
?? What problem is this proposal designed to
solve?
Unobtrusive mq client usage, and easily extensible to support
idempotence/eventually consistent/ fluid control extensions and so on.
?? To what degree should we solve the problem?
100%.
Non-Goals
?? What problem is this proposal NOT designed to
solve?
1. Add new features to classics mq client.
2. Affect compatibility.
?? Are there any limits of this proposal?
Only QSF(queue service framework) users will benefit.
Changes
Architecture
Interface Design/Change
?? Method signature changes
?? method name
?? parameter list
?? return value
Nothing.
?? Method behavior changes
Nothing.
?? CLI command changes
Nothing.
?? Log format or content changes
Nothing.
Compatibility, Deprecation, and Migration Plan
?? Are backward and forward compatibility taken
into consideration?
Yes.
?? Are there deprecated APIs?
Nothing.
?? How do we do migration?
Upgrade normally, no additional migration required.
Implementation Outline
We will implement the proposed changes by 1 phase. (QSF is implemented
and
works well in our project)
Phase 1
Complete the QSF mq client encapsulation.
Complete the QSF idempotency support
Rejected Alternatives
There are no other alternatives.
?6?7
