Open Stack

On 14/08/13 17:08 -0300, Sandy Walsh wrote:
>At Eric's request in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/41979/ I'm
>bringing this to the ML for feedback.
>
>Currently, oslo-common rpc behaviour is to always ack() a message no
>matter what.
>
Hey,

I don't think we should keep adding new features to Oslo's rpc, I'd
rather think how this fits into oslo.messaging.

>For billing purposes we can't afford to drop important notifications
>(like *.exists). We only want to ack() if no errors are raised by the
>consumer, otherwise we want to requeue the message.
>
>Now, once we introduce this functionality, we will also need to support
>.reject() semantics.
>
>The use-case we've seen for this is:
>1. grab notification
>2. write to disk
>3. do some processing on that notification, which raises an exception.
>4. the event is requeued and steps 2-3 repeat very quickly. Lots of
>duplicate records. In our case we've blown out our database.

Although I see some benefits from abstracting this, I'm not sure
whether we *really* need this in Oslo messaging. My main concern is
that acknowledgement is not supported by all back-ends and this can
turn out being a design flaw for apps depending on methods like ack()
/ reject().

Have you guys thought about re-sending the failed message on a
different topic / queue?

This is what Celery does to retry tasks on failures, for example.


FF

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco