How can I change this code to get rid of thread blocking? Here .get() blocks the thread to receive the result from the future. But can I absolutely avoid blocking? Something like - one thread sends the requests, and the other one receives responses and implements some code. To make it fully asynchronous.
I tried to use CompletableFuture, but couldn't really understand it.
Tried to make a callback method, but wasn't successful as well.
byte[] sendRequest(JSONObject jsonObject, String username, String password) throws IOException, ExecutionException, InterruptedException {
try (AsyncHttpClient client = new AsyncHttpClient()) {
String userPassword;
if (username != null && password != null) {
userPassword = username + ":" + password;
} else {
throw new NullPointerException("Нет логина и/или пароля.");
}
Future future = client.preparePost(apiUrl)
.addHeader("Content-Type", "application/json")
.addHeader("Authorization", "Basic " + DatatypeConverter.printBase64Binary(userPassword.getBytes()))
.setBody(jsonObject.toString().getBytes())
.execute(getHandler());
String response = (String) future.get();
return response.getBytes();
}
}
private AsyncCompletionHandler<String> getHandler() throws IOException {
return new AsyncCompletionHandler<String>() {
#Override
public String onCompleted(Response response) throws IOException {
return response.getResponseBody();
}
#Override
public void onThrowable(Throwable t) {
}
};
}
What I expect:
The program sends a request in the main thread.
Then there is a kind of a callback that waits for a response in an
alternative thread.
Still, the program continues working in the main thread - it goes on with sending more requests.
When the response from the server comes, the callback from the
alternative thread catches it and processes in some way, but it
doesn't correspond with the main thread
You should run your async task in new thread (preferably using ExecutorService or CompletableFuture). Pass CallbackHandler to the Runnable/Callable tasks and once the invocation is complete invoke handler methods.
Alternatively, if all you're worried about is handling async http requests, I'd suggest to not reinvent the wheel and instead use existing solutions. Example of async http client
For other use cases, you can follow the following example.
import java.util.*;
import java.lang.*;
import java.io.*;
class Ideone {
public static void main (String[] args) throws java.lang.Exception {
for (int i=0; i<10; i++) {
new Thread(new MyRunnable(new CallbackHandler())).start();
}
}
static class MyRunnable implements Runnable {
CallbackHandler handler;
public MyRunnable(CallbackHandler handler) {
this.handler = handler;
}
public void run() {
try {
Thread.sleep(100);
} catch(Exception e) {
} finally {
Random r = new Random();
if (r.nextBoolean()) {
handler.onSuccess();
} else {
handler.onError();
}
}
}
}
static class CallbackHandler {
public void onSuccess() {
System.out.println("Success");
}
public void onError() {
System.out.println("Error");
}
}
}
Related
I have singleton client with the below contract
public interface MQPublisher {
void publish(String message) throws ClientConnectionException, ClientErrorException;
void start() throws ClientException;
void stop();
}
The class which is using this publisher is as below :
public class MessagePublisher {
#Autowired
private MQPublisher publisher;
private AtomicBoolean isPublisherRunning;
public void startPublisher() {
if (!isPublisherRunning.get()) {
publisher.start();
isPublisherRunning.compareAndSet(false, true);
}
}
#Retry(RETRY_MSG_UPLOAD)
public void sendMessage(String msg) {
try {
startPublisher();
publisher.publish(msg); // when multiple requests fail with the same exception, what will happen??
} catch (Exception e) {
log.error("Exception while publishing message : {}", msg, e);
publisher.stop();
isPublisherRunning.compareAndSet(true, false);
throw e;
}
}
We are using resilience4j retry functionality to retry the sendMessage method. This works fine in case of a single request. Consider a case when multiple requests are processed parallely and all of them fails with an exception. In this case, these requests will be retried and there is a chance that one thread will start the publisher while the other will stop it and it will throw exceptions again. How to handle this scenario in a cleaner way?
It isn't clear why the whole publisher should be stopped in case of failure. Nevertheless, if there are real reasons for that, I would change the stop method to use an atomic timer that will restart on each message sending and stop the publisher only after at least 5 seconds (or the time needed for a message to be successfully sent) have passed from the message sending.
Something like that:
#Slf4j
public class MessagePublisher {
private static final int RETRY_MSG_UPLOAD = 10;
#Autowired
private MQPublisher publisher;
private AtomicBoolean isPublisherRunning;
private AtomicLong publishStart;
public void startPublisher() {
if (!isPublisherRunning.get()) {
publisher.start();
isPublisherRunning.compareAndSet(false, true);
}
}
#Retryable(maxAttempts = RETRY_MSG_UPLOAD)
public void sendMessage(String msg) throws InterruptedException {
try {
startPublisher();
publishStart.set(System.nanoTime());
publisher.publish(msg); // when multiple requests fail with the same exception, what will happen??
} catch (Exception e) {
log.error("Exception while publishing message : {}", msg, e);
while (System.nanoTime() < publishStart.get() + 5000000000L) {
Thread.sleep(1000);
}
publisher.stop();
isPublisherRunning.compareAndSet(true, false);
throw e;
}
}
}
I think it is important to mention (as you just did) that this is a terrible design, and that such calculations should be done by the publisher implementer and not by the caller.
I have seen lots of questions around about chunked streams in netty, but most of them were solutions about outbound streams, not inbound streams.
I would like to understand how can I get the data from the channel and send it as an InputStream to my business logic without loading all the data in memory first.
Here's what I was trying to do:
public class ServerRequestHandler extends MessageToMessageDecoder<HttpObject> {
private HttpServletRequest request;
private PipedOutputStream os;
private PipedInputStream is;
#Override
public void handlerAdded(ChannelHandlerContext ctx) throws Exception {
super.handlerAdded(ctx);
this.os = new PipedOutputStream();
this.is = new PipedInputStream(os);
}
#Override
public void handlerRemoved(ChannelHandlerContext ctx) throws Exception {
super.handlerRemoved(ctx);
this.os.close();
this.is.close();
}
#Override
protected void decode(ChannelHandlerContext ctx, HttpObject msg, List<Object> out)
throws Exception {
if (msg instanceof HttpRequest) {
this.request = new CustomHttpRequest((HttpRequest) msg, this.is);
out.add(this.request);
}
if (msg instanceof HttpContent) {
ByteBuf body = ((HttpContent) msg).content();
if (body.readableBytes() > 0)
body.readBytes(os, body.readableBytes());
if (msg instanceof LastHttpContent) {
os.close();
}
}
}
}
And then I have another Handler that will get my CustomHttpRequest and send to what I call a ServiceHandler, where my business logic will read from the InputStream.
public class ServiceRouterHandler extends SimpleChannelInboundHandler<CustomHttpRequest> {
...
#Override
public void channelRead0(ChannelHandlerContext ctx, CustomHttpRequest request) throws IOException {
...
future = serviceHandler.handle(request, response);
...
This does not work because when my Handler forwards the CustomHttpRequest to the ServiceHandler, and it tries to read from the InputStream, the thread is blocking, and the HttpContent is never handled in my Decoder.
I know I can try to create a separate thread for my Business Logic, but I have the impression I am overcomplicating things here.
I looked at ByteBufInputStream, but it says that
Please note that it only reads up to the number of readable bytes
determined at the moment of construction.
So I don't think it will work for Chunked Http requests. Also, I saw ChunkedWriteHandler, which seems fine for Oubound chunks, but I couldn't find something as ChunkedReadHandler...
So my question is: what's the best way to do this? My requirementes are:
- Do not keep data in memory before sending the ServiceHandlers;
- The ServiceHandlers API should be netty agnostic (that's why I use my CustomHttpRequest, instead of Netty's HttpRequest);
UPDATE
I have got this to work using a more reactive approach on the CustomHttpRequest. Now, the request does not provide an InputStream to the ServiceHandlers so they can read (which was blocking), but instead, the CustomHttpRequest now has a readInto(OutputStream) method that returns a Future, and all the service handler will just be executed when this Outputstream is fullfilled. Here is how it looks like
public class CustomHttpRequest {
...constructors and other methods hidden...
private final SettableFuture<Void> writeCompleteFuture = SettableFuture.create();
private final SettableFuture<OutputStream> outputStreamFuture = SettableFuture.create();
private ListenableFuture<Void> lastWriteFuture = Futures.transform(outputStreamFuture, x-> null);
public ListenableFuture<Void> readInto(OutputStream os) throws IOException {
outputStreamFuture.set(os);
return this.writeCompleteFuture;
}
ListenableFuture<Void> writeChunk(byte[] buf) {
this.lastWriteFuture = Futures.transform(lastWriteFuture, (AsyncFunction<Void, Void>) (os) -> {
outputStreamFuture.get().write(buf);
return Futures.immediateFuture(null);
});
return lastWriteFuture;
}
void complete() {
ListenableFuture<Void> future =
Futures.transform(lastWriteFuture, (AsyncFunction<Void, Void>) x -> {
outputStreamFuture.get().close();
return Futures.immediateFuture(null);
});
addFinallyCallback(future, () -> {
this.writeCompleteFuture.set(null);
});
}
}
And my updated ServletRequestHandler looks like this:
public class ServerRequestHandler extends MessageToMessageDecoder<HttpObject> {
private NettyHttpServletRequestAdaptor request;
#Override
public void handlerAdded(ChannelHandlerContext ctx) throws Exception {
super.handlerAdded(ctx);
}
#Override
public void handlerRemoved(ChannelHandlerContext ctx) throws Exception {
super.handlerRemoved(ctx);
}
#Override
protected void decode(ChannelHandlerContext ctx, HttpObject msg, List<Object> out)
throws Exception {
if (msg instanceof HttpRequest) {
HttpRequest request = (HttpRequest) msg;
this.request = new CustomHttpRequest(request, ctx.channel());
out.add(this.request);
}
if (msg instanceof HttpContent) {
ByteBuf buf = ((HttpContent) msg).content();
byte[] bytes = new byte[buf.readableBytes()];
buf.readBytes(bytes);
this.request.writeChunk(bytes);
if (msg instanceof LastHttpContent) {
this.request.complete();
}
}
}
}
This works pretty well, but still, note that everything here is done in a single thread, and maybe for large data I might want to spawn a new thread to release that thread for other channels.
You're on the right track - if your serviceHandler.handle(request, response); call is doing a blocking read, you need to create a new thread for it. Remember, there are supposed to be only a small number of Netty worker threads, so you shouldn't do any blocking calls in worker threads.
The other question to ask is, does your service handler need to be blocking? What does it do? If it's shoveling the data over the network anyway, can you incorporate it into the Netty pipeline in a non-blocking way? That way, everything is async all the way, no blocking calls and extra threads required.
I am trying to write a test for my android app that communicates with a cloud service.
Theoretically the flow for the test is supposed to be this:
Send request to the server in a worker thread
Wait for the response from the server
Check the response returned by the server
I am trying to use Espresso's IdlingResource class to accomplish that but it is not working as expected. Here's what I have so far
My Test:
#RunWith(AndroidJUnit4.class)
public class CloudManagerTest {
FirebaseOperationIdlingResource mIdlingResource;
#Before
public void setup() {
mIdlingResource = new FirebaseOperationIdlingResource();
Espresso.registerIdlingResources(mIdlingResource);
}
#Test
public void testAsyncOperation() {
Cloud.CLOUD_MANAGER.getDatabase().getCategories(new OperationResult<List<Category>>() {
#Override
public void onResult(boolean success, List<Category> result) {
mIdlingResource.onOperationEnded();
assertTrue(success);
assertNotNull(result);
}
});
mIdlingResource.onOperationStarted();
}
}
The FirebaseOperationIdlingResource
public class FirebaseOperationIdlingResource implements IdlingResource {
private boolean idleNow = true;
private ResourceCallback callback;
#Override
public String getName() {
return String.valueOf(System.currentTimeMillis());
}
public void onOperationStarted() {
idleNow = false;
}
public void onOperationEnded() {
idleNow = true;
if (callback != null) {
callback.onTransitionToIdle();
}
}
#Override
public boolean isIdleNow() {
synchronized (this) {
return idleNow;
}
}
#Override
public void registerIdleTransitionCallback(ResourceCallback callback) {
this.callback = callback;
}}
When used with Espresso's view matchers the test is executed properly, the activity waits and then check the result.
However plain JUNIT4 assert methods are ignored and JUnit is not waiting for my cloud operation to complete.
Is is possible that IdlingResource only work with Espresso methods ? Or am I doing something wrong ?
I use Awaitility for something like that.
It has a very good guide, here is the basic idea:
Wherever you need to wait:
await().until(newUserIsAdded());
elsewhere:
private Callable<Boolean> newUserIsAdded() {
return new Callable<Boolean>() {
public Boolean call() throws Exception {
return userRepository.size() == 1; // The condition that must be fulfilled
}
};
}
I think this example is pretty similar to what you're doing, so save the result of your asynchronous operation to a field, and check it in the call() method.
Junit will not wait for async tasks to complete. You can use CountDownLatch to block the thread, until you receive response from server or timeout.
Countdown latch is a simple yet elegant solution and does NOT need an external library. It also helps you focus on the actual logic to be tested rather than over-engineering the async wait or waiting for a response
void testBackgroundJob() {
Latch latch = new CountDownLatch(1);
//Do your async job
Service.doSomething(new Callback() {
#Override
public void onResponse(){
ACTUAL_RESULT = SUCCESS;
latch.countDown(); // notify the count down latch
// assertEquals(..
}
});
//Wait for api response async
try {
latch.await();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
assertEquals(expectedResult, ACTUAL_RESULT);
}
I need to send multiple requests to many different web services and receive the results. The problem is that, if I send the requests one by one it takes so long as I need to send and process all individually.
I am wondering how I can send all the requests at once and receive the results.
As the following code shows, I have three major methods and each has its own sub methods.
Each sub method sends request to its associated web service and receive the results;therefore, for example, to receive the results of web service 9 I have to wait till all web services from 1 to 8 get completed, it takes a long time to send all the requests one by one and receive their results.
As shown below none of the methods nor sub-methods are related to each other, so I can call them all and receive their results in any order, the only thing which is important is to receive the results of each sub-method and populate their associated lists.
private List<StudentsResults> studentsResults = new ArrayList();
private List<DoctorsResults> doctorsResults = new ArrayList();
private List<PatientsResults> patientsResults = new ArrayList();
main (){
retrieveAllLists();
}
retrieveAllLists(){
retrieveStudents();
retrieveDoctors();
retrievePatients();
}
retrieveStudents(){
this.studentsResults = retrieveStdWS1(); //send request to Web Service 1 to receive its list of students
this.studentsResults = retrieveStdWS2(); //send request to Web Service 2 to receive its list of students
this.studentsResults = retrieveStdWS3(); //send request to Web Service 3 to receive its list of students
}
retrieveDoctors(){
this.doctorsResults = retrieveDocWS4(); //send request to Web Service 4 to receive its list of doctors
this.doctorsResults = retrieveDocWS5(); //send request to Web Service 5 to receive its list of doctors
this.doctorsResults = retrieveDocWS6(); //send request to Web Service 6 to receive its list of doctors
}
retrievePatients(){
this.patientsResults = retrievePtWS7(); //send request to Web Service 7 to receive its list of patients
this.patientsResults = retrievePtWS8(); //send request to Web Service 8 to receive its list of patients
this.patientsResults = retrievePtWS9(); //send request to Web Service 9 to receive its list of patients
}
That is a simple fork-join approach, but for clarity, you can start any number of threads and retrieve the results later as they are available, such as this approach.
ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10);
List<Callable<String>> tasks = new ArrayList<>();
tasks.add(new Callable<String>() {
public String call() throws Exception {
Thread.sleep((new Random().nextInt(5000)) + 500);
return "Hello world";
}
});
List<Future<String>> results = pool.invokeAll(tasks);
for (Future<String> future : results) {
System.out.println(future.get());
}
pool.shutdown();
UPDATE, COMPLETE:
Here's a verbose, but workable solution. I wrote it ad hoc, and have not compiled it.
Given the three lists have diffent types, and the WS methods are individual, it is not
really modular, but try to use your best programming skills and see if you can modularize it a bit better.
ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10);
List<Callable<List<StudentsResults>>> stasks = new ArrayList<>();
List<Callable<List<DoctorsResults>>> dtasks = new ArrayList<>();
List<Callable<List<PatientsResults>>> ptasks = new ArrayList<>();
stasks.add(new Callable<List<StudentsResults>>() {
public List<StudentsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrieveStdWS1();
}
});
stasks.add(new Callable<List<StudentsResults>>() {
public List<StudentsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrieveStdWS2();
}
});
stasks.add(new Callable<List<StudentsResults>>() {
public List<StudentsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrieveStdWS3();
}
});
dtasks.add(new Callable<List<DoctorsResults>>() {
public List<DoctorsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrieveDocWS4();
}
});
dtasks.add(new Callable<List<DoctorsResults>>() {
public List<DoctorsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrieveDocWS5();
}
});
dtasks.add(new Callable<List<DoctorsResults>>() {
public List<DoctorsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrieveDocWS6();
}
});
ptasks.add(new Callable<List<PatientsResults>>() {
public List<PatientsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrievePtWS7();
}
});
ptasks.add(new Callable<List<PatientsResults>>() {
public List<PatientsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrievePtWS8();
}
});
ptasks.add(new Callable<List<PatientsResults>>() {
public List<PatientsResults> call() throws Exception {
return retrievePtWS9();
}
});
List<Future<List<StudentsResults>>> sresults = pool.invokeAll(stasks);
List<Future<List<DoctorsResults>>> dresults = pool.invokeAll(dtasks);
List<Future<List<PatientsResults>>> presults = pool.invokeAll(ptasks);
for (Future<List<StudentsResults>> future : sresults) {
this.studentsResults.addAll(future.get());
}
for (Future<List<DoctorsResults>> future : dresults) {
this.doctorsResults.addAll(future.get());
}
for (Future<List<PatientsResults>> future : presults) {
this.patientsResults.addAll(future.get());
}
pool.shutdown();
Each Callable returns a list of results, and is called in its own separate thread.
When you invoke the Future.get() method you get the result back onto the main thread.
The result is NOT available until the Callable have finished, hence there is no concurrency issues.
So just for fun I am providing two working examples. The first one shows the old school way of doing this before java 1.5. The second shows a much cleaner way using tools available within java 1.5:
import java.util.ArrayList;
public class ThreadingExample
{
private ArrayList <MyThread> myThreads;
public static class MyRunnable implements Runnable
{
private String data;
public String getData()
{
return data;
}
public void setData(String data)
{
this.data = data;
}
#Override
public void run()
{
}
}
public static class MyThread extends Thread
{
private MyRunnable myRunnable;
MyThread(MyRunnable runnable)
{
super(runnable);
setMyRunnable(runnable);
}
/**
* #return the myRunnable
*/
public MyRunnable getMyRunnable()
{
return myRunnable;
}
/**
* #param myRunnable the myRunnable to set
*/
public void setMyRunnable(MyRunnable myRunnable)
{
this.myRunnable = myRunnable;
}
}
public ThreadingExample()
{
myThreads = new ArrayList <MyThread> ();
}
public ArrayList <String> retrieveMyData ()
{
ArrayList <String> allmyData = new ArrayList <String> ();
if (isComplete() == false)
{
// Sadly we aren't done
return (null);
}
for (MyThread myThread : myThreads)
{
allmyData.add(myThread.getMyRunnable().getData());
}
return (allmyData);
}
private boolean isComplete()
{
boolean complete = true;
// wait for all of them to finish
for (MyThread x : myThreads)
{
if (x.isAlive())
{
complete = false;
break;
}
}
return (complete);
}
public void kickOffQueries()
{
myThreads.clear();
MyThread a = new MyThread(new MyRunnable()
{
#Override
public void run()
{
// This is where you make the call to external services
// giving the results to setData("");
setData("Data from list A");
}
});
myThreads.add(a);
MyThread b = new MyThread (new MyRunnable()
{
#Override
public void run()
{
// This is where you make the call to external services
// giving the results to setData("");
setData("Data from list B");
}
});
myThreads.add(b);
for (MyThread x : myThreads)
{
x.start();
}
boolean done = false;
while (done == false)
{
if (isComplete())
{
done = true;
}
else
{
// Sleep for 10 milliseconds
try
{
Thread.sleep(10);
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
public static void main(String [] args)
{
ThreadingExample example = new ThreadingExample();
example.kickOffQueries();
ArrayList <String> data = example.retrieveMyData();
if (data != null)
{
for (String s : data)
{
System.out.println (s);
}
}
}
}
This is the much simpler working version:
import java.util.HashSet;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Set;
import java.util.concurrent.Callable;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService;
import java.util.concurrent.Executors;
import java.util.concurrent.Future;
public class ThreadingExample
{
public static void main(String [] args)
{
ExecutorService service = Executors.newCachedThreadPool();
Set <Callable<String>> callables = new HashSet <Callable<String>> ();
callables.add(new Callable<String>()
{
#Override
public String call() throws Exception
{
return "This is where I make the call to web service A, and put its results here";
}
});
callables.add(new Callable<String>()
{
#Override
public String call() throws Exception
{
return "This is where I make the call to web service B, and put its results here";
}
});
callables.add(new Callable<String>()
{
#Override
public String call() throws Exception
{
return "This is where I make the call to web service C, and put its results here";
}
});
try
{
List<Future<String>> futures = service.invokeAll(callables);
for (Future<String> future : futures)
{
System.out.println (future.get());
}
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
catch (ExecutionException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
You can ask your jax-ws implementation to generate asynchronous bindings for the web service.
This has two advantages that I can see:
As discussed in Asynchronous web services calls with JAX-WS: Use wsimport support for asynchrony or roll my own? , jax-ws will generate well-tested (and possibly fancier) code for you, you need not instantiate the ExecutorService yourself. So less work for you! (but also less control over the threading implementation details)
The generated bindings include a method where you specify a callback handler, which may suit your needs better than synchronously get() ting all response lists on the thread calling retrieveAllLists(). It allows for per-service-call error handling and will process the results in parallel, which is nice if processing is non-trivial.
An example for Metro can be found on the Metro site. Note the contents of the custom bindings file custom-client.xml :
<bindings ...>
<bindings node="wsdl:definitions">
<enableAsyncMapping>true</enableAsyncMapping>
</bindings>
</bindings>
When you specify this bindings file to wsimport, it'll generate a client which returns an object that implements javax.xml.ws.Response<T>. Response extends the Future interface that others also suggest you use when rolling your own implementation.
So, unsurprisingly, if you go without the callbacks, the code will look similar to the other answers:
public void retrieveAllLists() throws ExecutionException{
// first fire all requests
Response<List<StudentsResults>> students1 = ws1.getStudents();
Response<List<StudentsResults>> students2 = ws2.getStudents();
Response<List<StudentsResults>> students3 = ws3.getStudents();
Response<List<DoctorsResults>> doctors1 = ws4.getDoctors();
Response<List<DoctorsResults>> doctors2 = ws5.getDoctors();
Response<List<DoctorsResults>> doctors3 = ws6.getDoctors();
Response<List<PatientsResults>> patients1 = ws7.getPatients();
Response<List<PatientsResults>> patients2 = ws8.getPatients();
Response<List<PatientsResults>> patients3 = ws9.getPatients();
// then await and collect all the responses
studentsResults.addAll(students1.get());
studentsResults.addAll(students2.get());
studentsResults.addAll(students3.get());
doctorsResults.addAll(doctors1.get());
doctorsResults.addAll(doctors2.get());
doctorsResults.addAll(doctors3.get());
patientsResults.addAll(patients1.get());
patientsResults.addAll(patients2.get());
patientsResults.addAll(patients3.get());
}
If you create callback handers such as
private class StudentsCallbackHandler
implements AsyncHandler<Response<List<StudentsResults>>> {
public void handleResponse(List<StudentsResults> response) {
try {
studentsResults.addAll(response.get());
} catch (ExecutionException e) {
errors.add(new CustomError("Failed to retrieve Students.", e.getCause()));
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
log.error("Interrupted", e);
}
}
}
you can use them like this:
public void retrieveAllLists() {
List<Future<?>> responses = new ArrayList<Future<?>>();
// fire all requests, specifying callback handlers
responses.add(ws1.getStudents(new StudentsCallbackHandler()));
responses.add(ws2.getStudents(new StudentsCallbackHandler()));
responses.add(ws3.getStudents(new StudentsCallbackHandler()));
...
// await completion
for( Future<?> response: responses ) {
response.get();
}
// or do some other work, and poll response.isDone()
}
Note that the studentResults collection needs to be thread safe now, since results will get added concurrently!
Looking at the problem, you need to integrate your application with 10+ different webservices.While making all the calls asynchronous. This can be done easily with Apache Camel. It is a prominent framework for enterprise integration and also supports async processing. You can use its CXF component for calling webservices and its routing engine for invocation and processing results. Look at the following page regarding camel's async routing capability. They have also provided a complete example invoking webservices async using CXF, it available at its maven repo. Also see the following page for more details.
You might consider the following paradigm in which you create work (serially), but the actual work is done in parallel. One way to do this is to: 1) have your "main" create a queue of work items; 2) create a "doWork" object that queries the queue for work to do; 3) have "main" start some number of "doWork" threads (can be same number as number of different services, or a smaller number); have the "doWork" objects put add their results to an object list (whatever construct works Vector, list...).
Each "doWork" object would mark their queue item complete, put all results in the passed container and check for new work (if no more on the queue, it would sleep and try again).
Of course you will want to see how well you can construct your class model. If each of the webservices is quite different for parsing, then you may want to create an Interface that each of your "retrieveinfo" classes promises to implement.
It has got various option to develop this.
JMS : quality of service and management, e.g. redelivery attempt, dead message queue, load management, scalability, clustering, monitoring, etc.
Simply using the Observer pattern for this. For more details OODesign and How to solve produce and consumer follow this Kodelog**
This is the code that works. It send a message to an Actor (Greeter) and wait for the answer back.
But it blocks the current thread.
public class Future1Blocking {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
ActorSystem system = ActorSystem.create("system");
final ActorRef actorRef = system.actorOf(Props.create(Greeter.class), "greeter");
Timeout timeout = new Timeout(Duration.create(5, "seconds"));
Future<Object> future = Patterns.ask(actorRef, Greeter.Msg.GREET, timeout);
// this blocks current running thread
Greeter.Msg result = (Greeter.Msg) Await.result(future, timeout.duration());
System.out.println(result);
}
}
What is the possible way for my example to use future.onSuccess to get the result without blocking the current calling thread?
Ahh. that's was easy (sorry).
future.onSuccess(new PrintResult<Object>(), system.dispatcher());
Where:
public final class PrintResult<T> extends OnSuccess<T> {
#Override public final void onSuccess(T t) {
System.out.println(t);
}
}