[rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ Aliveness Test vs Monitoring RabbitMQ Process

Prabhu, Saravana Saravana.Prabhu at emc.com
Wed Aug 22 11:56:23 BST 2012


I have one follow-up question with respect to verifying the Aliveness test behavior.

Is there a way in which we can simulate the behavior of having the RabbitMQ process (OS PID) up and running without being able to Send/Receive Messages.

-----Original Message-----
From: Prabhu, Saravana 
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4:08 PM
To: 'Emile Joubert'; Discussions about RabbitMQ
Subject: RE: [rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ Aliveness Test vs Monitoring RabbitMQ Process

Thanks a ton for the response...


-----Original Message-----
From: Emile Joubert [mailto:emile at rabbitmq.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 3:42 PM
To: Discussions about RabbitMQ
Cc: Prabhu, Saravana
Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ Aliveness Test vs Monitoring RabbitMQ Process


On 17/07/12 08:21, Saravana.Prabhu at emc.com wrote:
> I would like to know if we can have scenarios where Broker Process will
> be up and running, but it could not be able to publish and receive
> messages due to unknown reasons.

The API documentation has an explanation of what it does:


The aliveness test sends and receives a message. This is a more
meaningful (and more expensive) test than checking an OS PID. It only
makes sense to monitor the OS PID if you expect a crash so dramatic that
the entire Erlang VM crashes. This can happen e.g. in an out-of-memory
scenario, but there are many failure modes that could cause the broker
to stop working while the OS PID of the Erlang VM remains running. So I
suggest using the aliveness test instead.


More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list