[rabbitmq-discuss] AlreadyClosedException always sets hardError and initiatedByApplication to true

[Jonathan Halterman]

Hi Steve - Thanks for the response. Yes, this was helpful.

Cheers,
Jonathan


On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Steve Powell <steve at rabbitmq.com> wrote:

> Jonathan,
>
> I think it is not a bug but working as designed:
>
> The second invocation on the channel is an invocation on a closed channel,
> and this is a hard error, because it closes the connection. Furthermore
> this was initiated by an application call rather than arriving out of the
> blue from the server.
>
> There is no reason to expect that the 'flags' on the
> AlreadyClosedException have anything to do with the event which closed the
> channel/connection.
>
> As to the problem about recovery, it is the first exception (the
> IOException) which you need to catch; its cause will be the
> ShutdownSignalException, which tells you what the circumstances of the
> shutdown are (application?, hard?).
>
> Is this enough to help you recover correctly?
>
> Steve Powell  [*Cell*: +44-7815-838-558]
> *Links: **Pivotal* <http://gopivotal.com/>*, SpringSource<http://www.springsource.org/>
> , **VMware* <http://www.vmware.com/>*,*
>
> * **Virgo* <http://www.eclipse.org/virgo>*, *
> *RabbitMQ <http://www.rabbitmq.com/>.*
> *-----------------------------------------------------------------------*
> Good design:
>    is innovative, useful, and aesthetic;
>    is understandable, unobtrusive, and honest;
>    is long-lasting, thorough, and environmentally friendly;
>    and *is as little design as possible.*
> *(c) Dieter Rams, amended 2003; 2009; 2012*
>
> On 15 Oct 2013, at 23:56, Jonathan Halterman <jhalterman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Michael,
>
> Yea, you can reproduce both items by attempting to declare a consumer on a
> non-existent queue twice in a row. The first invocation closes the channel
> and throws an IOException. The second invocation throws an
> AlreadyClosedException, though the hardError and initiatedByApplication
> flags don't match those from the initial failure.
>
> - jonathan
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Michael Klishin <mklishin at gopivotal.com>wrote:
>
>> On oct 16, 2013, at 1:24 a.m., Jonathan Halterman <jhalterman at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I noticed that AlreadyClosedException always sets hardError and
>> initiatedByApplication to true, even if the error was not hard (only the
>> channel was closed) and the channel was not closed by the application. This
>> makes it more difficult to properly recover a closed resource if I can't
>> easily determine which resource was closed and why. Could this be fixed?
>>
>> Jonathan,
>>
>> This indeed sounds like a bug.
>>
>> How can we reproduce it? Simply attempt an operation on a closed channel?
>> Does it matter how exactly the channel was closed?
>>
>> MK
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20131021/5c68b88b/attachment.htm>