Error with RabbitMQ 3.0 + Client when sending messages with expiration date

436 views
Skip to first unread message

Wiebe

unread,
Nov 19, 2012, 12:03:35 PM11/19/12
to masstrans...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

I was just trying out RabbitMQ 3.0 (RabbitMQ.Client 3.0) today, but there seems to be a problem with sending messages with an expiration date...

It could also be a bug in the RabbitMQ.Client library (though it happens on both client library versions 2.8.7 and 3.0.0 connecting to RabbitMQ 3.0 Server) but just wanted to let everyone here know in case you're considering updating:

at MassTransit.Transports.RabbitMq.OutboundRabbitMqTransport.<>c__DisplayClass2.<Send>b__1(RabbitMqConnection connection) in d:\BuildAgent-03\work\8d1373c869590c5b\src\Transports\MassTransit.Transports.RabbitMq\OutboundRabbitMqTransport.cs:line 72
WARN  05:55:01 Invalid Connection when executing callback
RabbitMQ.Client.Exceptions.AlreadyClosedException: The AMQP operation was interrupted: AMQP close-reason, initiated by Peer, code=406, text="PRECONDITION_FAILED
 - invalid expiration '00:00:09.9859992': {leftover_string,":00:09.9859992"}", classId=60, methodId=40, cause=
   at RabbitMQ.Client.Impl.SessionBase.Transmit(Command cmd)
   at RabbitMQ.Client.Impl.ModelBase.ModelSend(MethodBase method, ContentHeaderBase header, Byte[] body)
   at RabbitMQ.Client.Impl.ModelBase.BasicPublish(String exchange, String routingKey, Boolean mandatory, Boolean immediate, IBasicProperties basicProperties, Byte[] body)
   at RabbitMQ.Client.Impl.ModelBase.BasicPublish(String exchange, String routingKey, Boolean mandatory, IBasicProperties basicProperties, Byte[] body)
   at RabbitMQ.Client.Impl.ModelBase.BasicPublish(String exchange, String routingKey, IBasicProperties basicProperties, Byte[] body)
   at MassTransit.Transports.RabbitMq.RabbitMqProducer.Publish(String exchangeName, IBasicProperties properties, Byte[] body) in d:\BuildAgent-03\work\8d1373c86
9590c5b\src\Transports\MassTransit.Transports.RabbitMq\RabbitMqProducer.cs:line 44
   at MassTransit.Transports.RabbitMq.OutboundRabbitMqTransport.<>c__DisplayClass2.<Send>b__1(RabbitMqConnection connection) in d:\BuildAgent-03\work\8d1373c869
590c5b\src\Transports\MassTransit.Transports.RabbitMq\OutboundRabbitMqTransport. cs:line 72

Best regards,

Wiebe

Chris Patterson

unread,
Nov 19, 2012, 12:38:09 PM11/19/12
to masstrans...@googlegroups.com
I'm changing this now.


On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Simon MacMullen <si...@rabbitmq.com> wrote:

Huh. So what's happening is that in RabbitMQ 3.0 we parse and handle the "expiration" property of each message for per-message TTL. Which means we expect it to be an integer. But it looks like MassTransit is sticking something else in there.

MassTransit devs: would it be a big deal to change this behaviour?

Cheers, Simon

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "masstransit-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to masstrans...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to masstransit-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/masstransit-discuss/-/ZXjF0mTmT94J.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Chris Patterson

unread,
Nov 19, 2012, 12:42:10 PM11/19/12
to masstrans...@googlegroups.com
Pushed a change to develop to set this field as milliseconds.

Wiebe

unread,
Nov 20, 2012, 4:17:22 AM11/20/12
to masstrans...@googlegroups.com
Hi Chris,

That's quick, thanks!

Wiebe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to masstransit-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

Wiebe

unread,
Nov 20, 2012, 4:34:17 AM11/20/12
to masstrans...@googlegroups.com
@Simon thanks for the quick response!


On Monday, November 19, 2012 6:28:03 PM UTC+1, Simon MacMullen wrote:

Huh. So what's happening is that in RabbitMQ 3.0 we parse and handle the "expiration" property of each message for per-message TTL. Which means we expect it to be an integer. But it looks like MassTransit is sticking something else in there.

MassTransit devs: would it be a big deal to change this behaviour?

Cheers, Simon

On Monday, November 19, 2012 5:03:35 PM UTC, Wiebe wrote:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages