Thats more of a question for them than me hehe. I do know there are
other folks using the component who were/are contributing, its the
main reason I know of it given I haven't actually used the bits, so
I'd expect another fork would turn up if needed and the Azure one
didnt work out.

Robbie

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 13:36, mpup371 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> yes, pure Go is tempting but the vcabbage development is stopped (there is
> still some issues ...).
>
> I'm not sure about the future of the fork on Azure: is there active
> maintainers behind this project ?
>
>
> Le lun. 20 avr. 2020 à 13:04, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> a
> écrit :
>
> > This is the discussion list to use. The person who wrote the Go bits
> > is subscribed, but is involved more on other bits these days.
> >
> > Given the limited traction around the Go bindings currently, you may
> > be better trying e.g. https://github.com/Azure/go-amqp (originally
> > from https://github.com/vcabbage/amqp) which has the benefit of also
> > being pure Go rather than relying on another C component.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 10:54, mpup371 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > hello again,
> > >
> > > yes PN_TRACE_FRM is very nice to understand what happens.
> > >
> > > is there a dedicated list for general discussions about electron, or
> > should
> > > I write directly to the author ?
> > >
> > > thx
> > > jf
> > >
> > >
> > > Le ven. 17 avr. 2020 à 13:17, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]>
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 11:15, mpup371 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello, thx for taking time to answer.
> > > > >
> > > > > I used the examples for experiencing with the protocol. I try
> > different
> > > > > things to understand what happens.
> > > > > For example it seems that even when setting credit to 200, the sender
> > > > seems
> > > > > to be blocked at 80 messages.
> > > > > I wonder if this limit is "hard-coded" somewhere.
> > > >
> > > > Not that I know/saw, but again im not familiar with the Go bits.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > thx for the tip PN_TRACE_FRM.
> > > > > I tried to examine the packets with wireshark, but apparently AMQP
> > 1.0 is
> > > > > not supported.
> > > > > It there another tool that can examine TCP/AMQP communication ?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wireshark got AMQP 1.0 support several years ago (though I havent used
> > > > it some time personally, as many things dont need that level of
> > > > inspection, just the PN_TRACE_FRM protocol trace tends to be enough).
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/ChugR/Adverb is a tool one of the committers,
> > > > Chuck, wrote to turn protocol captures into a web page for inspection.
> > > > It actually uses tshark from wireshark.
> > > >
> > > > Qpid Dispatch router has a scraper tool Chuck also wrote for analysing
> > > > the protocol trace from its log output:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/tree/1.11.0/tools/scraper
> > > >
> > > > > have a good day,
> > > > > jf
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le ven. 17 avr. 2020 à 11:43, Robbie Gemmell <
> > [email protected]>
> > > > a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:07, mpup371 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello, I am still experiencing with electron examples codes, and
> > > > there
> > > > > > is a
> > > > > > > strange behavior that I don't understand.
> > > > > > > Probably I don't understand well the protocol.
> > > > > > > If anyone has an idea ...
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > jf
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > sender :
> > > > > > >  go build; ./send  -debug -count 100 amqp://localhost:5672/topic
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 Started senders, expect 100 acknowledgements
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > Received all 100 acknowledgements
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > broker:
> > > > > > > go build; ./broker -debug
> > > > > > > Listening on [::]:5672
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 Accepted
> > [0x7f7760000ec0][::1]:5672-[::1]:60138
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 incoming connection:
> > (Connection)(0x7f7760000ec0)
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 incoming session: (Session)(0x7f7758000a50)
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 incoming receiver-link: send[431]@1(topic<-)
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 send[431]@1(topic<-): received topic0
> > > > > > > .....
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 incoming closed:
> > > > > > [0x7f7760000ec0][::1]:5672-[::1]:60138
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:52:50 send[431]@1(topic<-) error: EOF
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > receiver:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > go build; ./receive -debug -count 1 amqp://localhost:5672/topic
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 Connecting to amqp://localhost:5672/topic
> > > > > > > Listening on 1 connections
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 topic0
> > > > > > > Received 1 messages
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 close [0xa3e220][::1]:60140-[::1]:5672
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *why the receiver hangs after closing the connection ?*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > borker :
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 Accepted [0x1ebfef0][::1]:5672-[::1]:60140
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 incoming connection: (Connection)(0x1ebfef0)
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 incoming session: (Session)(0x7f7758000a50)
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 incoming sender-link: receive[531]@1(topic->)
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 receive[531]@1(topic->): sent topic0
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 receive[531]@1(topic->): sent topic1
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 receive[531]@1(topic->): sent topic2
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 incoming closed:
> > > > [0x1ebfef0][::1]:5672-[::1]:60140
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 message topic1 put back, status
> > unacknowledged,
> > > > error
> > > > > > > EOF
> > > > > > > 2020/04/15 15:53:15 receive[531]@1(topic->) closed: EOF
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *the server send 3 messages while the receiver only asked 1,
> > before
> > > > it
> > > > > > sees
> > > > > > > that the connection is closed. *
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not at all familiar with the Go bits for proton-c, but I dont
> > see
> > > > > > where the broker example would limit what it tries to send based on
> > > > > > the amount of credit actually granted by the receiver. If it doesnt
> > > > > > actually limit based on credit then it perhaps 'sends' things in
> > the
> > > > > > queue and the message is really just buffered for send and doesnt
> > > > > > actually go out unless there is sufficient credit given. Its also
> > > > > > possible the receiver actually gave more credit than the 'count' it
> > > > > > desires and so more were sent by the example broker but not
> > > > > > accepted(/other) by the receiver since it was already done.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The underlying proton-c bits print protocol trace to stdout if you
> > run
> > > > > > with environment variable PN_TRACE_FRM=1 , you could try enabling
> > that
> > > > > > to better see what it is happening at the protocol level. I'd also
> > > > > > remember that these are simple examples and it isnt a full blown
> > > > > > broker, so unless you are actually trying to write a server with
> > the
> > > > > > bits you may be better off experimenting against something else.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > is there a better way to pop up only x messages from a queue and
> > then
> > > > > > close
> > > > > > > the connection ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to