[rabbitmq-discuss] How to shutdown cleanly a Java application using Consumers?
mcintoshj at gmail.com
Wed Apr 2 21:10:55 BST 2014
We use consumers here with the spring libraries. If you use them, there's
a "Shutdown" command you can call as needed. We've had pretty good luck
with it so far. The spring consumer stuff manages how many consumers are
running, connection threading, etc. - and it has very good shutdown hooks.
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Bertrand Guay-Paquet <bernie at step.polymtl.ca
> I'm using the RabbitMQ Java client API and need some guidance on the
> proper application shutdown procedure.
> Here's how I start the application:
> 1-Create a Connection
> 2-Create different types of consumers, each with its own channel, and call
> channel.basicConsume("queue", false, consumer)
> 3-Let it all run
> This works great, but I can't figure out how to cleanly shutdown the
> application. If I simply close the Connection, each created channel
> immediately (or soon enough) becomes invalid and any Consumer currently
> doing some work fails when trying to ack their current message or perform
> any other action on the channel. I'd like to let the consumers finish
> whatever message they're processing and then close everything down. I guess
> I need to keep track of the created Consumers and somehow signal them to
> stop accepting new messages and after they're all done with their current
> job, close the connection? Is that possible or is there another way? I
> haven't found any management methods for the consumer classes to control or
> query their status.
> The information I found so far is related to manually created threads that
> poll the queues to process messages. In that case, it's really easy because
> I can just set a flag on each runnable to exit after processing their
> current message and join on all the threads before closing the underlying
> connection. So this leads me to ask, as a side note: are Consumers the way
> to go to use RabbitMQ in real-world scenarios or should I poll on the
> queues? It seems to me that Consumers would be the better choice (polling
> is bad), but if they're less powerful, perhaps they're not a silver bullet
> in my case.
> Thank you,
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss