john :
I am using below class to send data to our messaging queue by using socket either in a synchronous way or asynchronous way as shown below.
sendAsync- It sends data asynchronously without any timeout. After sending(on LINE A)it adds toretryHolderbucket so that if acknowledgement is not received then it will retry again from the background thread which is started in a constructor.send- It internally callssendAsyncmethod and then sleep for a particular timeout period and if acknowledgement is not received then it removes fromretryHolderbucket so that we don't retry again.
So the only difference between those two above methods is - For async I need to retry at all cost but for sync I don't need to retry but looks like it might be getting retried since we share the same retry bucket cache and retry thread runs every 1 second.
ResponsePoller is a class which receives the acknowledgement for the data that was sent to our messaging queue and then calls removeFromretryHolder method below to remove the address so that we don't retry after receiving the acknowledgement.
public class SendToQueue {
private final ExecutorService cleanupExecutor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(5);
private final ScheduledExecutorService executorService = Executors.newScheduledThreadPool(3);
private final Cache<Long, byte[]> retryHolder =
CacheBuilder
.newBuilder()
.maximumSize(1000000)
.concurrencyLevel(100)
.removalListener(
RemovalListeners.asynchronous(new LoggingRemovalListener(), cleanupExecutor)).build();
private static class Holder {
private static final SendToQueue INSTANCE = new SendToQueue();
}
public static SendToQueue getInstance() {
return Holder.INSTANCE;
}
private SendToQueue() {
executorService.submit(new ResponsePoller()); // another thread which receives acknowledgement and then delete entry from the `retryHolder` cache accordingly.
executorService.scheduleAtFixedRate(new Runnable() {
@Override
public void run() {
// retry again
for (Entry<Long, byte[]> entry : retryHolder.asMap().entrySet()) {
sendAsync(entry.getKey(), entry.getValue());
}
}
}, 0, 1, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
}
public boolean sendAsync(final long address, final byte[] encodedRecords, final Socket socket) {
ZMsg msg = new ZMsg();
msg.add(encodedRecords);
// send data on a socket LINE A
boolean sent = msg.send(socket);
msg.destroy();
retryHolder.put(address, encodedRecords);
return sent;
}
public boolean send(final long address, final byte[] encodedRecords, final Socket socket) {
boolean sent = sendAsync(address, encodedRecords, socket);
// if the record was sent successfully, then only sleep for timeout period
if (sent) {
try {
TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS.sleep(500);
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
}
}
// if key is not present, then acknowledgement was received successfully
sent = !retryHolder.asMap().containsKey(address);
// and key is still present in the cache, then it means acknowledgment was not received after
// waiting for timeout period, so we will remove it from cache.
if (!sent)
removeFromretryHolder(address);
return sent;
}
public void removeFromretryHolder(final long address) {
retryHolder.invalidate(address);
}
}
What is the best way by which we dont retry if anyone is calling send method but we still need to know whether acknowledgement was received or not. Only thing is I dont need to retry at all.
Do we need separate bucket for all the sync calls just for acknowledgement and we dont retry from that bucket?
ewramner :
The code has a number of potential issues:
- An answer may be received before the call to
retryHolder#put. - Possibly there is a race condition when messages are retried too.
- If two messages are sent to the same address the second overwrites the first?
- Send always wastes time with a sleep, use a
wait+notifyinstead.
I would store a class with more state instead. It could contain a flag (retryIfNoAnswer yes/no) that the retry handler could check. It could provide waitForAnswer/markAnswerReceived methods using wait/notify so that send doesn't have to sleep for a fixed time. The waitForAnswer method can return true if an answer was obtained and false on timeout. Put the object in the retry handler before sending and use a timestamp so that only messages older than a certain age are retried. That fixes the first race condition.
EDIT: updated example code below, compiles with your code, not tested:
public class SendToQueue {
private final ExecutorService cleanupExecutor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(5);
private final ScheduledExecutorService executorService = Executors.newScheduledThreadPool(3);
// Not sure why you are using a cache rather than a standard ConcurrentHashMap?
private final Cache<Long, PendingMessage> cache = CacheBuilder.newBuilder().maximumSize(1000000)
.concurrencyLevel(100)
.removalListener(RemovalListeners.asynchronous(new LoggingRemovalListener(), cleanupExecutor)).build();
private static class PendingMessage {
private final long _address;
private final byte[] _encodedRecords;
private final Socket _socket;
private final boolean _retryEnabled;
private final Object _monitor = new Object();
private long _sendTimeMillis;
private volatile boolean _acknowledged;
public PendingMessage(long address, byte[] encodedRecords, Socket socket, boolean retryEnabled) {
_address = address;
_sendTimeMillis = System.currentTimeMillis();
_encodedRecords = encodedRecords;
_socket = socket;
_retryEnabled = retryEnabled;
}
public synchronized boolean hasExpired() {
return System.currentTimeMillis() - _sendTimeMillis > 500L;
}
public synchronized void markResent() {
_sendTimeMillis = System.currentTimeMillis();
}
public boolean shouldRetry() {
return _retryEnabled && !_acknowledged;
}
public boolean waitForAck() {
try {
synchronized(_monitor) {
_monitor.wait(500L);
}
return _acknowledged;
}
catch (InterruptedException e) {
return false;
}
}
public void ackReceived() {
_acknowledged = true;
synchronized(_monitor) {
_monitor.notifyAll();
}
}
public long getAddress() {
return _address;
}
public byte[] getEncodedRecords() {
return _encodedRecords;
}
public Socket getSocket() {
return _socket;
}
}
private static class Holder {
private static final SendToQueue INSTANCE = new SendToQueue();
}
public static SendToQueue getInstance() {
return Holder.INSTANCE;
}
private void handleRetries() {
List<PendingMessage> messages = new ArrayList<>(cache.asMap().values());
for (PendingMessage m : messages) {
if (m.hasExpired()) {
if (m.shouldRetry()) {
m.markResent();
doSendAsync(m, m.getSocket());
}
else {
// Or leave the message and let send remove it
cache.invalidate(m.getAddress());
}
}
}
}
private SendToQueue() {
executorService.submit(new ResponsePoller()); // another thread which receives acknowledgement and then delete entry from the cache accordingly.
executorService.scheduleAtFixedRate(new Runnable() {
@Override
public void run() {
handleRetries();
}
}, 0, 1, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
}
public boolean sendAsync(final long address, final byte[] encodedRecords, final Socket socket) {
PendingMessage m = new PendingMessage(address, encodedRecords, socket, true);
cache.put(address, m);
return doSendAsync(m, socket);
}
private boolean doSendAsync(final PendingMessage pendingMessage, final Socket socket) {
ZMsg msg = new ZMsg();
msg.add(pendingMessage.getEncodedRecords());
try {
// send data on a socket LINE A
return msg.send(socket);
}
finally {
msg.destroy();
}
}
public boolean send(final long address, final byte[] encodedRecords, final Socket socket) {
PendingMessage m = new PendingMessage(address, encodedRecords, socket, false);
cache.put(address, m);
try {
if (doSendAsync(m, socket)) {
return m.waitForAck();
}
return false;
}
finally {
// Alternatively (checks that address points to m):
// cache.asMap().remove(address, m);
cache.invalidate(address);
}
}
public void handleAckReceived(final long address) {
PendingMessage m = cache.getIfPresent(address);
if (m != null) {
m.ackReceived();
cache.invalidate(address);
}
}
}
And called from ResponsePoller:
SendToQueue.getInstance().handleAckReceived(addressFrom);
Guess you like
Origin http://10.200.1.11:23101/article/api/json?id=438265&siteId=1