In Mule 4 is there any any way to run the Mule-Batch in synchronous Mode
I have done several projects using mule batch component.
Now present case we have a situation where need to dependent on the output produced by the mule batch component.For my case it is creating a file in asynchronous mode which
contains the below information.
studentId,Name,Status
1,bijoy,enrolled
2,hari,not_enrolled,
3,piyush,erolled
But as it is running in asynchronous mode could not rely on the data.
My question is is there any way to run mule Batch (Mule 4) synchronously?
No, it is not possible to run a Batch synchronously within the flow it is called, by design.
As an alternative you could put the logic that you want to execute after the batch in a separate flow that listens to a VM queue. In the On Complete phase of the batch you can send a message to that VM queue. The listening flow can't receive batch data directly but for a file it should be OK.
Having said that, file exchange is not a very good method of exchanging information inside an application. I would recommend to explore alternatives like databases for transient data, unless you just need the file to send it elsewhere.
Related
Please refer to this thread for reference:
redis lua script vs. single calls
How does calling redis from inside lua script lead to reduced network communication. How's it different from making redis calls from inside our application ?
Since we're working with redis asynchronous, does this mean, once we've made call to redis.call(), it'll not wait for the result and straightway move to the next line ? If yes, then what if the value returned from redis.call() is used just below it and redis is still processing the redis.call() command?
I am using spring-kafka latest version and using #KafkaListener. I am using BatchListener. In the method that is listening to the list of messages i want to call the acknowledge only if the batch of records are processed. But the spring framework is not sending those messages again until I restart the application. So I used stop() and start() methods on KafkaListenerEndpointRegistry if the records were not processed but I feel like its not a good way of solving the problem. Is there a better way of handling this.
See the documentation for the SeekToCurrentBatchErrorHandler.
The SeekToCurrentBatchErrorHandler seeks each partition to the first record in each partition in the batch so the whole batch is replayed. This error handler does not support recovery because the framework cannot know which message in the batch is failing.
I have an application that is working well in production, but I wonder if I could have implemented the concurrency better....
ASP.NET .NET 4, C#
Basically, it generates n number of sql statements on the fly (approx 50 at the moment) and then runs them concurrently and writes the data to .csv files.
EDIT: First I create a thread to do all the work on so the page request can return. Then on that thread...
For each of the SQL statements I create a new Task using the TPL and execute it using a datareader and write the data to disk. When the last file is created I write some summary data to a summary file and zip it all up and give it to the user.
Should I have used Threads or Asynchronous Delegates instead?
I haven't posted code as I am really just wondering if my overall approach (i.e. TPL) is the best option in this situation.
Please don't lecture me about creating dynamic sql, it is totally necessary due to the technicalities of the database I am reading from and not relevant to the question. (Its the back end of a proprietary system. Got 7 thousand+ tables).
Should I have used Threads or Asynchronous Delegates instead?
Apparently, your background thread operation spans across the boundaries of a single HTTP request. In this case, it doesn't really matter what API you use to run such operation: Task.Run, Delegate.BeginInvoke, ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem, new Thread or anything else.
You shouldn't be running a lengthy background thread operation, which lifetime spans multiple HTTP requests, inside ASP.NET address space. While it's relatively easy to implement, this approach may have issues with IIS maintainability, scalability and security. Create a WCF service for that and call it from your ASP.NET page:
How to: Host a WCF Service in a Managed Windows Service.
If we start a new thread in ASP.Net from the thread which is serving the http request, and new thread has an unhandled exception, the worker process will crash immediately. Even if we use WCF service and call that from ASP.Net the ASP.Net thread is going to wait for the result. So better use any queuing mechanism so that the requests is in queue and queue can process in a different time based on the processing capacity. Of course when we say queuing we need to think about queue failure, requeue etc...But its worth if the application is big and needs to scale.
Team:
I need to invoke a WF activity (XAML) from a WF service (XAMLX) asynchronously. I am already referencing the Microsoft.Activities.Extensions framework and I'm running on the Platform Update 1 for the state machine -- so if the solution is already in one of those libraries I'm ready!
Now, I need to invoke that activity (XAML) asynchronously -- but it has an output parameter that needs to set a variable in the service (XAMLX). Can somebody please provide me a solution to this?
Thanks!
* UPDATE *
Now I can post pictures, * I think *, because I have enough reputation! Let me put a couple out here and try to better explain my problem. The first picture is the WF Service that has the two entry points for the workflow -- the second is the workflow itself.
This workflow is an orchestration mechanism that constantly restarts itself, and has some failover mechanisms (e.g. exit on error threshold and soft exit) so that we can manage our queue of durable transactions using WF!
Now, we had this workflow working great when it was all one WF Service because we could call the service, get a response back and send the value of that response back into another entry point in a trigger to issue a soft exit. However, a new requirement has arrisen asking us to make the workflow itself a WF activity in another project and have the Receive/Send-Reply sequences in the WF Service Application project.
However, we need to be able to startup this workflow and forget about it -- then let it know somehow that a soft exit is necessary later on down the road -- but since WF executes on a single thread this has become a bit challenging at best.
Strictly speaking in XAML activities Parallel and ParallelForEach are how you perform asynchrony.
The workflow scheduler only uses a single thread (much like UI) so any activity that is running will typically be running on the same thread, unless it implements AsyncCodeActivity, in which case you are simply handing back the scheduler thread to the runtime while waiting for a callback from whichever async code your AsyncCodeActivity implementation is calling.
Therefore are you sure this is what you want to achieve? Do you mean you want to run it after you have sent your initial response? In this case place your activity after the Send Reply.
Please provide more info if these suggestions don't answer your question./
Update:
The original requirement posed (separating implementation from the service Receive/Send activities) may actually be solved by hosting the target activity as a service. See the following link
http://blog.petegoo.com/index.php/2011/09/02/building-an-enterprise-workflow-system-with-wf4/
Problem: Some 300 candidates make a test using Flex. A test consist of some 100 exercises. After each exercise a .NET service is called to store the result. If a candidate finishes a test, all the data of his/her test is denormalized by Asp.NET. This denormalization can take some cpu and can take 5 to 10 seconds. Now, most of the times, some of the candidates have finished their test earlier than the rest, but still some 200 of them wait until their time is up. At that moment, 200 candidates finish their test and 200 sessions are denormalized at the same time. At this point, server load (cpu) is too high and cause calls to the webserver to go wrong. Now, instead of all these sessions being normalized concurrently, I would like to add them to a queue using MSMQ.
Question:
How do you process the Queue?
Do you start a separate thread in the Application_Start of global.asax that listens to the queue? If there are messages, they are dealt one at the time.
Is it necessary to do this in a separate thread? What if in the global.asax you just call a singleton for instance that starts listening to the queue? In what thread will this singleton run? (what's the thread that calls global.asax)
What are best practices to implement this? Links? Resources? Tutorials? Examples?
I don't like the idea, but could you put an exe on the root of your website, an exe that starts a process listening to the queue...
If you get a message out of the queue, do you remove it when you pull it out or do you remove it if denormalization for this session was successful? If you remove it when you pull it out and something goes wrong...
I could also create my own queue in memory, but restarting the webserver would empty the queue and a lot of sessions would end up not being normalized, so I guess this is really a bad idea.
Is MSMQ a good choice or are there better alternatives?
You could consider using a WCF-Service with MSMQ transport. I used this approach in an application that calculates commissions:
User completes asp.net wizard configuring calculation parameters
Calculation Job is sent to WCF-Service using MSMQ transport
Service transaction is completed as soon as Job entered MSMQ
New transaction scope is created for processing Job instances
One drawback is that the transaction will require MSDTC which will add some overhead when targeting MS SQL Server and even more when dealing with Oracle.
IDesign provides a lot of useful samples and best practices on WCF queueing.
Personally, I use a servicebus for scenario's like that. I know this sounds like an overkill, but I think the .net servicebusses are so good that they require the least amount of code written by you, because it's not easy to create a good scheduler for background processes without disturbing the threads of the application pool the webapp is running in. NServicebus and MassTransit are both good an well enough documented servicebuses for your scenario. With a servicebus, you have a framework that writes to msmq and listens to msmq in several apps connected by the messagequeue. The bus makes it easy for you to create a separate app that runs as a background service and is connected with your web-app by the message queue. When you use topself (included in nservicebus and masstransit), an installer/uninstaller for the seperate apps is automatically generated by the service bus.
Question: Why don't you like the idea of having a separate exe?
How do you process the Queue?
Do you start a separate thread in the Application_Start of global.asax
that listens to the queue? If there are messages, they are dealt one at
the time.
Is it necessary to do this in a separate thread? What if in the
global.asax you just call a singleton for instance that starts listening to
the queue? In what thread will this singleton run? (what's the thread that
calls global.asax)
[skip]
I don't like the idea, but could you put an exe on the root of your website, an exe that > starts a process listening to the queue...
Normally another program processes the queue - not ASP.NET. Either a windows service or an executable that you run under a scheduler (and there's no reason to put it in the root of your website).
If you get a message out of the queue, do you remove it when you pull
it out or do you remove it if denormalization for this session was
successful? If you remove it when you pull it out and something goes
wrong...
For critical work, you perform a transactional read. Items aren't removed from the queue until you commit your read operation, but while the transaction is open, no other process can get the item.
What are best practices to implement this? Links? Resources? Tutorials? Examples?
This tutorial is a good introduction and John Breakwell's blog is excellent and offers a lot of good links (including the ones in his easy-to-find sidebar "MSMQ Documentation").