[jira] [Assigned] (QPID-5799) Allow qpid.messaging.endpoints.session to have all associated receivers mointored via epoll mechanism

["Ken Giusti (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-5799?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Ken Giusti reassigned QPID-5799:
--------------------------------

    Assignee: Ken Giusti

> Allow qpid.messaging.endpoints.session to have all associated receivers mointored via epoll mechanism
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: QPID-5799
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-5799
>             Project: Qpid
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Python Client
>            Reporter: Brian Bouterse
>            Assignee: Ken Giusti
>
> Kombu [0] is a python producer/consumer software that I've written a qpid transport[1] for. This qpid transport for Kombu, uses qpid.messaging, and has all consuming receivers associated with a single session endpoint.
> Celery[2] uses Kombu, and has an asynchronous I/O event loop, and would like to monitor a single file descriptor for reading to know when there is any message available on any receiver associated with the session endpoint.
> Currently as a workaround, I create a pipe with one read and one write file descriptors. I register the read file descriptor with Celery to monitor. I then start a separate thread (Thread1) that calls next_receiver() on the session in an infinite loop. Each time next_receiver() returns instead of fetching the message, Thread1 writes a symbol to the file descriptor Celery is monitoring. Celery then calls the on_readable() callback from the MainThread, which removes a symbol from the pipe Celery is monitoring (clearing the epoll readable attribute), and then calls next_receiver() again only this time from MainThread, to acquire the receiver, and fetch() the message and process it.
> This architecture is not ideal in two ways.
> 1. There is a redundant call to next_receiver() that happens with every read.
> 2. A separate thread to "monitor" qpid messaging should not be required, when Celery is already capable of monitoring a single file descriptor, and can call the read method which would use next_receiver() to drain from all receivers associated with the session.
> [0]:  https://github.com/celery/kombu
> [1]:  https://github.com/pulp/kombu/blob/pulp-dep-3.0.15-with-qpid/kombu/transport/qpid.py
> [2]:  https://github.com/celery/celery



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org