Develop Reference

How to reconsume a rejected message later, RabbitMQ

Sometimes due to some external problems, I need to requeue a message by basic.reject with requeue = true.
But I don't need to consume it immediately because it will possibly fail again in a short time. If I continuously requeue it, this may result in infinite loop and requeue.
So I need to consume it later, say one minute later,
And I need to know how many times the messages has been requeue so that I can stop requeue it but only reject it to declare it fails to consume.
PS: I am using Java client.

There are multiple solutions to point 1.
First one is the one chosen by Celery (a Python producer/consumer library that can use RabbitMQ as broker). Inside your message, add a timestamp at which the task should be executed. When your consumer gets the message, do not ack it and check its timestamp. As soon as the timestamp is reached, the worker can execute the task. (Note that the worker can continue working on other tasks instead of waiting)
This technique has some drawbacks. You have to increase the QoS per channel to an arbitrary value. And if your worker is already working on a long running task, the delayed task wont be executed until the first task has finished.
A second technique is RabbitMQ-only and is much more elegant. It takes advantage of dead-letter exchanges and Messages TTL. You create a new queue which isn't consumed by anybody. This queue has a dead-letter exchange that will forward the messages to the consumer queue. When you want to defer a message, ack it (or reject it without requeue) from the consumer queue and copy the message into the dead-lettered queue with a TTL equal to the delay you want (say one minute later). At (roughly) the end of TTL, the defered message will magically land in the consumer queue again, ready to be consumed. RabbitMQ team has also made the Delayed Message Plugin (this plugin is marked as experimental yet fairly stable and potential suitable for production use as long as the user is aware of its limitations and has serious limitations in term of scalability and reliability in case of failover, so you might decide whether you really want to use it in production, or if you prefer to stick to the manual way, limited to one TTL per queue).
Point 2. just requires putting a counter in your message and handling this inside your app. You can choose to put this counter in a header or directly in the body.

Consume all messages on Kafka topic and disconnect

I have a batch job which will be triggered once a day. The requirement is to
consume all the messages available on the Kafka Topic at that point of time
Process the messages
If the process was successfully completed, commit the offsets.
Currently I poll() the messages in while loop until ConsumerRecords.isEmpty() is true. When ConsumerRecords.isEmpty() is true I assume all the records available on Topic at the point of time has been consumed. The application maintains the offsets and closes the kafka consumer.
When the processing on messages is done and successfully completed, I create a new KafkaConsumer and commit the offsets maintained by the application.
Note I close the KafkaConsumer initially used to read the messages and use another KafkaConsumer instance to commit the offsets to avoid the consumer rebalance exception.
I am expecting max of 5k messages on Topic. The topic is partitioned and replicated.
Is there any better way to consume all messages on Topic at a specific point of time ? Is there anything I am missing or need to take care of ? I don't think I need to take care of consumer rebalancing since I poll() for the messages in loop and process the messages after the polling is done.
I am using java kafka client v0.9 and can change to v0.10 if it helps in above scenario.
Thanks
Updated:
AtomicBoolean flag = new AtomicBoolean();
flag.set(true);
while(flag.get()) {
ConsumerRecords<String, String> consumerRecords = kafkaConsumer.poll(timeout);
if(consumerRecords.isEmpty()) {
flag.set(false);
continue;
}
//if the ConsumerRecords is not empty process the messages and continue to poll()
}
kafkaConsumer.close();

You can't assume that after a call to poll() you have read all the messages available in the topic in that moment due to the max.poll.records configuration parameter on the consumer. This is the maximum number of records returned by a single poll() and its default value is 500. It means that if in that moment there are i.e. 600 messages in the topic, you need two calls on poll() for reading all the messages (but consider that meanwhile some other messages could arrive).
The other thing I don't understand is why you are using a different consumer for committing offsets. What's the consumer rebalance exception you are talking about ?

RabbitMQ Batch Ack

I had a question on how rabbitmq works with batching acknowledgements. I understand that the Prefetch value is the max number of messages that will get queued before reaching its limit. However, I wasn't sure if the ack's manage themselves or if I have to manage this in code.
Which method is correct?
Send each basicAck with multiple set to true
or
wait until 10 acks were supposed to be sent out and send only the last one and AMQP will automatically send all previous in queue. (with multiple set to true)

TL;DR multiple = true is faster in some cases but requires a lot more careful book keeping and batch like requirements
The consumer gets messages that have a monotonic-ly growing id specific to that consumer. The id is a 64 bit number (it actually might be an unsigned 32 bit but since Java doesn't have that its a long) called the delivery tag. The prefetch is the most messages a consumer will receive that are unacked.
When you ack the highest delivery tag with multiple true it will acknowledge all the unacked messages with a lower delivery tag (smaller number) that the consumer has outstanding. Obviously if you have high prefetch this is faster than acking each message.
Now RabbitMQ knows the consumer received the messages (the unacked ones) but it doesn't know if all those messages have been correctly consumed. So it is on the burden of you the developer to make sure all the previous messages have been consumed. The consumer will deliver the messages in order (I believe internally the client uses a BlockingQueue) but depending on the library/client used downstream the messages might not be.
Thus this really only works well when you are batching the messages together in a single go (e.g. transaction or sending a group of messages off to some other system) or buffering reliably. Often this is done with a blocking queue and then periodically draining the queue to send a group of messages to a downstream system.
On the other hand if you are streaming each message in real time then you can't really do this (ie multiple = false).
There is also the case of one of the message being bad in the group (e.g. drained from internal queue... not rabbit queue) and you won't to nack that bad one. If that is the case you can't use multiple = true either.
Finally if you wait for a certain amount messages (instead of say time) more than the prefetch you will wait indefinitely.... not a good idea. You need to wait on time and number of messages must be <= prefetch.
As you can see its fairly nontrivial to correctly use multiple = true.

First one correction regarding Prefetch value is the max number of messages that will get queued before reaching its limit. - this is not what prefetch value is; prefetch value is the number of UN-ACKed messages that consumer "gets" from the queue. So they are kind of assigned to the consumer but remain in the queue until they are acknowledged. Quote from here, when prefetch is 1
This tells RabbitMQ not to give more than one message to a worker at a
time. Or, in other words, don't dispatch a new message to a worker
until it has processed and acknowledged the previous one.
And for your question:
I wasn't sure if the ack's manage themselves or if I have to manage
this in code.
You can set the auto ack flag to true and then you could say that the ack's manage themselves

Consume all of a Kafka topic and then immediately disconnect?

I'm mostly using Kafka for traditional messaging but I'd also like the ability to consume small topics in a batch fashion, i.e. connect to a topic, consume all the messages and immediately disconnect (not block waiting for new messages). All my topics have a single partition (though they are replicated across a cluster) and I'd like to use the high-level consumer if possible. It's not clear from the docs how I could accomplish such a thing in Scala (or Java). Any advice gratefully received.

The consumer.timeout.ms setting will throw a timeout exception after the specified time if no message is consumed before and this is the only option you have with the high level consumer afaik. Using this you could set it to something like 1 second and disconnect after that if it's an acceptable solution.
If not, you'd have to use the simple consumer and check message offsets.

Effective strategy to avoid duplicate messages in apache kafka consumer

I have been studying apache kafka for a month now. I am however, stuck at a point now. My use case is, I have two or more consumer processes running on different machines. I ran a few tests in which I published 10,000 messages in kafka server. Then while processing these messages I killed one of the consumer processes and restarted it. Consumers were writing processed messages in a file. So after consumption finished, file was showing more than 10k messages. So some messages were duplicated.
In consumer process I have disabled auto commit. Consumers manually commit offsets batch wise. So for e.g if 100 messages are written to file, consumer commits offsets. When single consumer process is running and it crashes and recovers duplication is avoided in this manner. But when more than one consumers are running and one of them crashes and recovers, it writes duplicate messages to file.
Is there any effective strategy to avoid these duplicate messages?

The short answer is, no.
What you're looking for is exactly-once processing. While it may often seem feasible, it should never be relied upon because there are always caveats.
Even in order to attempt to prevent duplicates you would need to use the simple consumer. How this approach works is for each consumer, when a message is consumed from some partition, write the partition and offset of the consumed message to disk. When the consumer restarts after a failure, read the last consumed offset for each partition from disk.
But even with this pattern the consumer can't guarantee it won't reprocess a message after a failure. What if the consumer consumes a message and then fails before the offset is flushed to disk? If you write to disk before you process the message, what if you write the offset and then fail before actually processing the message? This same problem would exist even if you were to commit offsets to ZooKeeper after every message.
There are some cases, though, where
exactly-once processing is more attainable, but only for certain use cases. This simply requires that your offset be stored in the same location as unit application's output. For instance, if you write a consumer that counts messages, by storing the last counted offset with each count you can guarantee that the offset is stored at the same time as the consumer's state. Of course, in order to guarantee exactly-once processing this would require that you consume exactly one message and update the state exactly once for each message, and that's completely impractical for most Kafka consumer applications. By its nature Kafka consumes messages in batches for performance reasons.
Usually your time will be more well spent and your application will be much more reliable if you simply design it to be idempotent.

This is what Kafka FAQ has to say on the subject of exactly-once:
How do I get exactly-once messaging from Kafka?
Exactly once semantics has two parts: avoiding duplication during data production and avoiding duplicates during data consumption.
There are two approaches to getting exactly once semantics during data production:
Use a single-writer per partition and every time you get a network error check the last message in that partition to see if your last write succeeded
Include a primary key (UUID or something) in the message and deduplicate on the consumer.
If you do one of these things, the log that Kafka hosts will be duplicate-free. However, reading without duplicates depends on some co-operation from the consumer too. If the consumer is periodically checkpointing its position then if it fails and restarts it will restart from the checkpointed position. Thus if the data output and the checkpoint are not written atomically it will be possible to get duplicates here as well. This problem is particular to your storage system. For example, if you are using a database you could commit these together in a transaction. The HDFS loader Camus that LinkedIn wrote does something like this for Hadoop loads. The other alternative that doesn't require a transaction is to store the offset with the data loaded and deduplicate using the topic/partition/offset combination.
I think there are two improvements that would make this a lot easier:
Producer idempotence could be done automatically and much more cheaply by optionally integrating support for this on the server.
The existing high-level consumer doesn't expose a lot of the more fine grained control of offsets (e.g. to reset your position). We will be working on that soon

I agree with RaGe's deduplicate on the consumer side. And we use Redis to deduplicate Kafka message.
Assume the Message class has a member called 'uniqId', which is filled by the producer side and is guaranteed to be unique. We use a 12 length random string. (regexp is '^[A-Za-z0-9]{12}$')
The consumer side use Redis's SETNX to deduplicate and EXPIRE to purge expired keys automatically. Sample code:
Message msg = ... // eg. ConsumerIterator.next().message().fromJson();
Jedis jedis = ... // eg. JedisPool.getResource();
String key = "SPOUT:" + msg.uniqId; // prefix name at will
String val = Long.toString(System.currentTimeMillis());
long rsps = jedis.setnx(key, val);
if (rsps <= 0) {
log.warn("kafka dup: {}", msg.toJson()); // and other logic
} else {
jedis.expire(key, 7200); // 2 hours is ok for production environment;
}
The above code did detect duplicate messages several times when Kafka(version 0.8.x) had situations. With our input/output balance audit log, no message lost or dup happened.

There's a relatively new 'Transactional API' now in Kafka that can allow you to achieve exactly once processing when processing a stream. With the transactional API, idempotency can be built in, as long as the remainder of your system is designed for idempotency. See https://www.baeldung.com/kafka-exactly-once

Whatever done on producer side, still the best way we believe to deliver exactly once from kafka is to handle it on consumer side:
Produce msg with a uuid as the Kafka message Key into topic T1
consumer side read the msg from T1, write it on hbase with uuid as rowkey
read back from hbase with the same rowkey and write to another topic T2
have your end consumers actually consume from topic T2