Search Results

Search found 30 results on 2 pages for 'gregor samsa'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

  • Windows Azure Service Bus Splitter and Aggregator

    - by Alan Smith
    This article will cover basic implementations of the Splitter and Aggregator patterns using the Windows Azure Service Bus. The content will be included in the next release of the “Windows Azure Service Bus Developer Guide”, along with some other patterns I am working on. I’ve taken the pattern descriptions from the book “Enterprise Integration Patterns” by Gregor Hohpe. I bought a copy of the book in 2004, and recently dusted it off when I started to look at implementing the patterns on the Windows Azure Service Bus. Gregor has also presented an session in 2011 “Enterprise Integration Patterns: Past, Present and Future” which is well worth a look. I’ll be covering more patterns in the coming weeks, I’m currently working on Wire-Tap and Scatter-Gather. There will no doubt be a section on implementing these patterns in my “SOA, Connectivity and Integration using the Windows Azure Service Bus” course. There are a number of scenarios where a message needs to be divided into a number of sub messages, and also where a number of sub messages need to be combined to form one message. The splitter and aggregator patterns provide a definition of how this can be achieved. This section will focus on the implementation of basic splitter and aggregator patens using the Windows Azure Service Bus direct programming model. In BizTalk Server receive pipelines are typically used to implement the splitter patterns, with sequential convoy orchestrations often used to aggregate messages. In the current release of the Service Bus, there is no functionality in the direct programming model that implements these patterns, so it is up to the developer to implement them in the applications that send and receive messages. Splitter A message splitter takes a message and spits the message into a number of sub messages. As there are different scenarios for how a message can be split into sub messages, message splitters are implemented using different algorithms. The Enterprise Integration Patterns book describes the splatter pattern as follows: How can we process a message if it contains multiple elements, each of which may have to be processed in a different way? Use a Splitter to break out the composite message into a series of individual messages, each containing data related to one item. The Enterprise Integration Patterns website provides a description of the Splitter pattern here. In some scenarios a batch message could be split into the sub messages that are contained in the batch. The splitting of a message could be based on the message type of sub-message, or the trading partner that the sub message is to be sent to. Aggregator An aggregator takes a stream or related messages and combines them together to form one message. The Enterprise Integration Patterns book describes the aggregator pattern as follows: How do we combine the results of individual, but related messages so that they can be processed as a whole? Use a stateful filter, an Aggregator, to collect and store individual messages until a complete set of related messages has been received. Then, the Aggregator publishes a single message distilled from the individual messages. The Enterprise Integration Patterns website provides a description of the Aggregator pattern here. A common example of the need for an aggregator is in scenarios where a stream of messages needs to be combined into a daily batch to be sent to a legacy line-of-business application. The BizTalk Server EDI functionality provides support for batching messages in this way using a sequential convoy orchestration. Scenario The scenario for this implementation of the splitter and aggregator patterns is the sending and receiving of large messages using a Service Bus queue. In the current release, the Windows Azure Service Bus currently supports a maximum message size of 256 KB, with a maximum header size of 64 KB. This leaves a safe maximum body size of 192 KB. The BrokeredMessage class will support messages larger than 256 KB; in fact the Size property is of type long, implying that very large messages may be supported at some point in the future. The 256 KB size restriction is set in the service bus components that are deployed in the Windows Azure data centers. One of the ways of working around this size restriction is to split large messages into a sequence of smaller sub messages in the sending application, send them via a queue, and then reassemble them in the receiving application. This scenario will be used to demonstrate the pattern implementations. Implementation The splitter and aggregator will be used to provide functionality to send and receive large messages over the Windows Azure Service Bus. In order to make the implementations generic and reusable they will be implemented as a class library. The splitter will be implemented in the LargeMessageSender class and the aggregator in the LargeMessageReceiver class. A class diagram showing the two classes is shown below. Implementing the Splitter The splitter will take a large brokered message, and split the messages into a sequence of smaller sub-messages that can be transmitted over the service bus messaging entities. The LargeMessageSender class provides a Send method that takes a large brokered message as a parameter. The implementation of the class is shown below; console output has been added to provide details of the splitting operation. public class LargeMessageSender {     private static int SubMessageBodySize = 192 * 1024;     private QueueClient m_QueueClient;       public LargeMessageSender(QueueClient queueClient)     {         m_QueueClient = queueClient;     }       public void Send(BrokeredMessage message)     {         // Calculate the number of sub messages required.         long messageBodySize = message.Size;         int nrSubMessages = (int)(messageBodySize / SubMessageBodySize);         if (messageBodySize % SubMessageBodySize != 0)         {             nrSubMessages++;         }           // Create a unique session Id.         string sessionId = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();         Console.WriteLine("Message session Id: " + sessionId);         Console.Write("Sending {0} sub-messages", nrSubMessages);           Stream bodyStream = message.GetBody<Stream>();         for (int streamOffest = 0; streamOffest < messageBodySize;             streamOffest += SubMessageBodySize)         {                                     // Get the stream chunk from the large message             long arraySize = (messageBodySize - streamOffest) > SubMessageBodySize                 ? SubMessageBodySize : messageBodySize - streamOffest;             byte[] subMessageBytes = new byte[arraySize];             int result = bodyStream.Read(subMessageBytes, 0, (int)arraySize);             MemoryStream subMessageStream = new MemoryStream(subMessageBytes);               // Create a new message             BrokeredMessage subMessage = new BrokeredMessage(subMessageStream, true);             subMessage.SessionId = sessionId;               // Send the message             m_QueueClient.Send(subMessage);             Console.Write(".");         }         Console.WriteLine("Done!");     }} The LargeMessageSender class is initialized with a QueueClient that is created by the sending application. When the large message is sent, the number of sub messages is calculated based on the size of the body of the large message. A unique session Id is created to allow the sub messages to be sent as a message session, this session Id will be used for correlation in the aggregator. A for loop in then used to create the sequence of sub messages by creating chunks of data from the stream of the large message. The sub messages are then sent to the queue using the QueueClient. As sessions are used to correlate the messages, the queue used for message exchange must be created with the RequiresSession property set to true. Implementing the Aggregator The aggregator will receive the sub messages in the message session that was created by the splitter, and combine them to form a single, large message. The aggregator is implemented in the LargeMessageReceiver class, with a Receive method that returns a BrokeredMessage. The implementation of the class is shown below; console output has been added to provide details of the splitting operation.   public class LargeMessageReceiver {     private QueueClient m_QueueClient;       public LargeMessageReceiver(QueueClient queueClient)     {         m_QueueClient = queueClient;     }       public BrokeredMessage Receive()     {         // Create a memory stream to store the large message body.         MemoryStream largeMessageStream = new MemoryStream();           // Accept a message session from the queue.         MessageSession session = m_QueueClient.AcceptMessageSession();         Console.WriteLine("Message session Id: " + session.SessionId);         Console.Write("Receiving sub messages");           while (true)         {             // Receive a sub message             BrokeredMessage subMessage = session.Receive(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));               if (subMessage != null)             {                 // Copy the sub message body to the large message stream.                 Stream subMessageStream = subMessage.GetBody<Stream>();                 subMessageStream.CopyTo(largeMessageStream);                   // Mark the message as complete.                 subMessage.Complete();                 Console.Write(".");             }             else             {                 // The last message in the sequence is our completeness criteria.                 Console.WriteLine("Done!");                 break;             }         }                     // Create an aggregated message from the large message stream.         BrokeredMessage largeMessage = new BrokeredMessage(largeMessageStream, true);         return largeMessage;     } }   The LargeMessageReceiver initialized using a QueueClient that is created by the receiving application. The receive method creates a memory stream that will be used to aggregate the large message body. The AcceptMessageSession method on the QueueClient is then called, which will wait for the first message in a message session to become available on the queue. As the AcceptMessageSession can throw a timeout exception if no message is available on the queue after 60 seconds, a real-world implementation should handle this accordingly. Once the message session as accepted, the sub messages in the session are received, and their message body streams copied to the memory stream. Once all the messages have been received, the memory stream is used to create a large message, that is then returned to the receiving application. Testing the Implementation The splitter and aggregator are tested by creating a message sender and message receiver application. The payload for the large message will be one of the webcast video files from http://www.cloudcasts.net/, the file size is 9,697 KB, well over the 256 KB threshold imposed by the Service Bus. As the splitter and aggregator are implemented in a separate class library, the code used in the sender and receiver console is fairly basic. The implementation of the main method of the sending application is shown below.   static void Main(string[] args) {     // Create a token provider with the relevant credentials.     TokenProvider credentials =         TokenProvider.CreateSharedSecretTokenProvider         (AccountDetails.Name, AccountDetails.Key);       // Create a URI for the serivce bus.     Uri serviceBusUri = ServiceBusEnvironment.CreateServiceUri         ("sb", AccountDetails.Namespace, string.Empty);       // Create the MessagingFactory     MessagingFactory factory = MessagingFactory.Create(serviceBusUri, credentials);       // Use the MessagingFactory to create a queue client     QueueClient queueClient = factory.CreateQueueClient(AccountDetails.QueueName);       // Open the input file.     FileStream fileStream = new FileStream(AccountDetails.TestFile, FileMode.Open);       // Create a BrokeredMessage for the file.     BrokeredMessage largeMessage = new BrokeredMessage(fileStream, true);       Console.WriteLine("Sending: " + AccountDetails.TestFile);     Console.WriteLine("Message body size: " + largeMessage.Size);     Console.WriteLine();         // Send the message with a LargeMessageSender     LargeMessageSender sender = new LargeMessageSender(queueClient);     sender.Send(largeMessage);       // Close the messaging facory.     factory.Close();  } The implementation of the main method of the receiving application is shown below. static void Main(string[] args) {       // Create a token provider with the relevant credentials.     TokenProvider credentials =         TokenProvider.CreateSharedSecretTokenProvider         (AccountDetails.Name, AccountDetails.Key);       // Create a URI for the serivce bus.     Uri serviceBusUri = ServiceBusEnvironment.CreateServiceUri         ("sb", AccountDetails.Namespace, string.Empty);       // Create the MessagingFactory     MessagingFactory factory = MessagingFactory.Create(serviceBusUri, credentials);       // Use the MessagingFactory to create a queue client     QueueClient queueClient = factory.CreateQueueClient(AccountDetails.QueueName);       // Create a LargeMessageReceiver and receive the message.     LargeMessageReceiver receiver = new LargeMessageReceiver(queueClient);     BrokeredMessage largeMessage = receiver.Receive();       Console.WriteLine("Received message");     Console.WriteLine("Message body size: " + largeMessage.Size);       string testFile = AccountDetails.TestFile.Replace(@"\In\", @"\Out\");     Console.WriteLine("Saving file: " + testFile);       // Save the message body as a file.     Stream largeMessageStream = largeMessage.GetBody<Stream>();     largeMessageStream.Seek(0, SeekOrigin.Begin);     FileStream fileOut = new FileStream(testFile, FileMode.Create);     largeMessageStream.CopyTo(fileOut);     fileOut.Close();       Console.WriteLine("Done!"); } In order to test the application, the sending application is executed, which will use the LargeMessageSender class to split the message and place it on the queue. The output of the sender console is shown below. The console shows that the body size of the large message was 9,929,365 bytes, and the message was sent as a sequence of 51 sub messages. When the receiving application is executed the results are shown below. The console application shows that the aggregator has received the 51 messages from the message sequence that was creating in the sending application. The messages have been aggregated to form a massage with a body of 9,929,365 bytes, which is the same as the original large message. The message body is then saved as a file. Improvements to the Implementation The splitter and aggregator patterns in this implementation were created in order to show the usage of the patterns in a demo, which they do quite well. When implementing these patterns in a real-world scenario there are a number of improvements that could be made to the design. Copying Message Header Properties When sending a large message using these classes, it would be great if the message header properties in the message that was received were copied from the message that was sent. The sending application may well add information to the message context that will be required in the receiving application. When the sub messages are created in the splitter, the header properties in the first message could be set to the values in the original large message. The aggregator could then used the values from this first sub message to set the properties in the message header of the large message during the aggregation process. Using Asynchronous Methods The current implementation uses the synchronous send and receive methods of the QueueClient class. It would be much more performant to use the asynchronous methods, however doing so may well affect the sequence in which the sub messages are enqueued, which would require the implementation of a resequencer in the aggregator to restore the correct message sequence. Handling Exceptions In order to keep the code readable no exception handling was added to the implementations. In a real-world scenario exceptions should be handled accordingly.

    Read the article

  • Zend Framework command line see errors

    - by sims
    I'm using a method outline by gregor (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/143320/create-cronjob-with-zend-framework) to create command line execution for parts of my application such as cron jobs, admin tasks, and the like. It works, however, no errors get reported when I create a new object that has not been defined (misspelling) and other such mistakes. I would have thought that php would report an error, but it fails silently. What is the reason for this? Is there a better way to achieve my goal? Or how can I implement this so that I can see errors? Many thanks! Here is the code: in public/index.php if(!defined('RUN_APP') || RUN_APP == true) { $application->bootstrap()->run(); } application/cron.php define("RUN_APP",false); require(realpath('/var/www/domain/public/index.php')); $application->bootstrap(); //the rest

    Read the article

  • Oracle Developer Day, Poland, 2012

    - by Geertjan
    Oracle Developer Day took place in Poland today. Oracle's Gregor Rayman did the keynote, where NetBeans was positioned, yet again, as Oracle's IDE for the Java Platform, via the JavaFX Roadmap: Well, it's not so clear from my pic above, but NetBeans is closely tied to the JavaFX Roadmap, as well as the JDK Roadmap too. Then the tracks started, one of which was the Java Track (the other two tracks were on ADF/WebLogic and SOA/BPM/BAM), where among other things I demonstrated the Java EE 6 Platform via tools in NetBeans IDE at some length. The room could hardly have been fuller, chairs had to be brought in and people were standing along the walls. The above pic shows the session being set up, with the room full of developers ready to hear about Java EE 6. I also did a session on pluggable Java desktop development (i.e., NetBeans Platform) and on "What's New in NetBeans IDE 7.1?", while Martin Grebac had a session on Java EE Web Services. Some of the many questions asked during the day that I thought were interesting: Is there localization support for the @Pattern annotation? I.e., what if I want to display the error message in Polish, what do I do? Is there filtering/sorting support for the DataTable component in JSF? Why is there no visual editor for ejb-jar.xml, in the same way that there is for web.xml? "Would be handy if there were to be a JSR for IDE Keyboard Shortcuts." (Two different people asked this question, separately, without knowing about each other. The second didn't know about the Eclipse and IntelliJ keyboard shortcut support in NetBeans IDE and was happy when I told them about it.) Wouldn't it be cool if, on start up, or during installation, there'd be a question: "Are you migrating from Eclipse/IntelliJ?" Then, if "yes", reset the keyboard shortcuts to match the IDE they're coming from.Is there a way in NetBeans to find subclasses of a class? "Would be cool if HTML or JSF files could be visualized in the same way as JavaFX and Swing classes." I.e., Visual Debugger for web developers. I had a great day and am looking at the Oracle Developer Day that will be held in Cluj, Romania, on Friday.

    Read the article

  • Overriding the save() method of a model that uses django-mptt

    - by saturdayplace
    I've been using django-mptt in my project for a while now, it's fabulous. Recently, I've found a need to override a model's save() method that uses mptt, and I'm getting an error when I try to save a new instance of that model: Exception Type: ValueError at /admin/scrivener/page/add/ Exception Value: Cannot use None as a query value I'm assuming that this is a result of the fact that the instance hasn't been stuck into a tree yet, but I'm not sure how to go about fixing this. I added a comment about it onto a similar issue on the project's tracker, but I was hoping that someone here might be able to put me on the right track faster. Here's the traceback. Environment: Request Method: POST Request URL: http://localhost:8000/admin/scrivener/page/add/ Django Version: 1.2 rc 1 SVN-13117 Python Version: 2.6.4 Installed Applications: ['django.contrib.auth', 'django.contrib.contenttypes', 'django.contrib.sessions', 'django.contrib.sites', 'django.contrib.admin', 'django.contrib.sitemaps', 'mptt', 'filebrowser', 'south', 'haystack', 'django_static', 'etc', 'scrivener', 'gregor', 'annunciator'] Installed Middleware: ('django.middleware.common.CommonMiddleware', 'django.contrib.sessions.middleware.SessionMiddleware', 'django.contrib.auth.middleware.AuthenticationMiddleware') Traceback: File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\core\handlers\base.py" in get_response 100. response = callback(request, *callback_args, **callback_kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\contrib\admin\options.py" in wrapper 239. return self.admin_site.admin_view(view)(*args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\utils\decorators.py" in _wrapped_view 74. response = view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\views\decorators\cache.py" in _wrapped_view_func 69. response = view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\contrib\admin\sites.py" in inner 190. return view(request, *args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\utils\decorators.py" in _wrapper 21. return decorator(bound_func)(*args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\utils\decorators.py" in _wrapped_view 74. response = view_func(request, *args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\utils\decorators.py" in bound_func 17. return func(self, *args2, **kwargs2) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\transaction.py" in _commit_on_success 299. res = func(*args, **kw) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\contrib\admin\options.py" in add_view 795. self.save_model(request, new_object, form, change=False) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\contrib\admin\options.py" in save_model 597. obj.save() File "B:\django-apps\scrivener\models.py" in save 205. self.url = self.get_absolute_url() File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\utils\functional.py" in _curried 55. return _curried_func(*(args+moreargs), **dict(kwargs, **morekwargs)) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\models\base.py" in get_absolute_url 940. return settings.ABSOLUTE_URL_OVERRIDES.get('%s.%s' % (opts.app_label, opts.module_name), func)(self, *args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\models\__init__.py" in inner 31. bits = func(*args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\scrivener\models.py" in get_absolute_url 194. for ancestor in self.get_ancestors(): File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\mptt\models.py" in get_ancestors 23. opts.tree_id_attr: getattr(self, opts.tree_id_attr), File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\models\manager.py" in filter 141. return self.get_query_set().filter(*args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\models\query.py" in filter 550. return self._filter_or_exclude(False, *args, **kwargs) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\models\query.py" in _filter_or_exclude 568. clone.query.add_q(Q(*args, **kwargs)) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\models\sql\query.py" in add_q 1131. can_reuse=used_aliases) File "B:\django-apps\3rd Party Source\django\db\models\sql\query.py" in add_filter 1000. raise ValueError("Cannot use None as a query value") Exception Type: ValueError at /admin/scrivener/page/add/ Exception Value: Cannot use None as a query value

    Read the article

  • C++0x rvalue references - lvalues-rvalue binding

    - by Doug
    This is a follow-on question to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2748866/c0x-rvalue-references-and-temporaries In the previous question, I asked how this code should work: void f(const std::string &); //less efficient void f(std::string &&); //more efficient void g(const char * arg) { f(arg); } It seems that the move overload should probably be called because of the implicit temporary, and this happens in GCC but not MSVC (or the EDG front-end used in MSVC's Intellisense). What about this code? void f(std::string &&); //NB: No const string & overload supplied void g1(const char * arg) { f(arg); } void g2(const std::string & arg) { f(arg); } It seems that, based on the answers to my previous question that function g1 is legal (and is accepted by GCC 4.3-4.5, but not by MSVC). However, GCC and MSVC both reject g2 because of clause 13.3.3.1.4/3, which prohibits lvalues from binding to rvalue ref arguments. I understand the rationale behind this - it is explained in N2831 "Fixing a safety problem with rvalue references". I also think that GCC is probably implementing this clause as intended by the authors of that paper, because the original patch to GCC was written by one of the authors (Doug Gregor). However, I don't this is quite intuitive. To me, (a) a const string & is conceptually closer to a string && than a const char *, and (b) the compiler could create a temporary string in g2, as if it were written like this: void g2(const std::string & arg) { f(std::string(arg)); } Indeed, sometimes the copy constructor is considered to be an implicit conversion operator. Syntactically, this is suggested by the form of a copy constructor, and the standard even mentions this specifically in clause 13.3.3.1.2/4, where the copy constructor for derived-base conversions is given a higher conversion rank than other implicit conversions: A conversion of an expression of class type to the same class type is given Exact Match rank, and a conversion of an expression of class type to a base class of that type is given Conversion rank, in spite of the fact that a copy/move constructor (i.e., a user-defined conversion function) is called for those cases. (I assume this is used when passing a derived class to a function like void h(Base), which takes a base class by value.) Motivation My motivation for asking this is something like the question asked in http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2696156/how-to-reduce-redundant-code-when-adding-new-c0x-rvalue-reference-operator-over ("How to reduce redundant code when adding new c++0x rvalue reference operator overloads"). If you have a function that accepts a number of potentially-moveable arguments, and would move them if it can (e.g. a factory function/constructor: Object create_object(string, vector<string>, string) or the like), and want to move or copy each argument as appropriate, you quickly start writing a lot of code. If the argument types are movable, then one could just write one version that accepts the arguments by value, as above. But if the arguments are (legacy) non-movable-but-swappable classes a la C++03, and you can't change them, then writing rvalue reference overloads is more efficient. So if lvalues did bind to rvalues via an implicit copy, then you could write just one overload like create_object(legacy_string &&, legacy_vector<legacy_string> &&, legacy_string &&) and it would more or less work like providing all the combinations of rvalue/lvalue reference overloads - actual arguments that were lvalues would get copied and then bound to the arguments, actual arguments that were rvalues would get directly bound. Questions My questions are then: Is this a valid interpretation of the standard? It seems that it's not the conventional or intended one, at any rate. Does it make intuitive sense? Is there a problem with this idea that I"m not seeing? It seems like you could get copies being quietly created when that's not exactly expected, but that's the status quo in places in C++03 anyway. Also, it would make some overloads viable when they're currently not, but I don't see it being a problem in practice. Is this a significant enough improvement that it would be worth making e.g. an experimental patch for GCC?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2