Problem description
Multicast is a powerful EIP which supports parallel execution paths in asynchronous manner. There are various ways a Camel user can configure a multicast EIP. Check out the extensive documentation here 1. One can configure to execute all the child paths independently and continue routing the last reply as the outgoing message (default behavior unless you provide an aggregation strategy) 2. Additionally, you can plug in an implementation of a Camel aggregation strategy with user-defined logic to aggregate the output from each of those child paths before continuing further downstream routing.
For the use case discussed below, the requirement is to aggregate the computed results from all child paths before it gets routed to the downstream processors in the flow. The idea is to keep routing the aggregated results if at least one child route completes successfully without an exception. We also want to stop routing further if all the child exchanges experienced failures.
Use case
Check out the following Camel routes
@Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
onException(Exception.class)
.useOriginalMessage()
.handled(true)
.log("Exception handler invoked")
.transform().constant("{\"data\" : \"err\"}")
.end();
from("jetty:http://localhost:8081/myapi?httpMethodRestrict=GET")
.log("received request")
.log("Entering multicast")
.multicast(new SimpleFlowMergeAggregator())
.parallelProcessing().to("direct:A", "direct:B")
.end()
.log("Aggregated results ${body}")
.log("Another log")
.transform(simple("{\"result\" : \"success\"}"))
.end();
from("direct:A")
.log("Executing PATH_1 - exception path")
.transform(constant("DATA_FROM_PATH_1"))
.log("Starting exception throw")
.throwException(new Exception("USER INITIATED EXCEPTION"))
.log("PATH_1")
.end();
from("direct:B")
.log("Executing PATH_2 - success path")
.delayer(1000)
.transform(constant("DATA_FROM_PATH_2"))
.log("PATH_2")
.end();
}
Following strategy aggregates the output of each multicast child route as a java list
public class SimpleFlowMergeAggregator implements AggregationStrategy {
private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(SimpleFlowMergeAggregator.class.getName());
@Override
public Exchange aggregate(Exchange oldExchange, Exchange newExchange) {
LOGGER.info("Inside aggregator " + newExchange.getIn().getBody());
if(oldExchange == null) {
String data = newExchange.getIn().getBody(String.class);
List<String> aggregatedDataList = new ArrayList<>();
aggregatedDataList.add(data);
newExchange.getIn().setBody(aggregatedDataList);
return newExchange;
}
List<String> oldData = oldExchange.getIn().getBody(List.class);
oldData.add(newExchange.getIn().getBody(String.class));
oldExchange.getIn().setBody(oldData);
return oldExchange;
}
}
On executing the same, we see following logs
2021-05-06 12:43:18.565 INFO 13956 --- [qtp916897446-42] route1 : received request
2021-05-06 12:43:18.566 INFO 13956 --- [qtp916897446-42] route1 : Entering multicast
2021-05-06 12:43:18.575 INFO 13956 --- [ #4 - Multicast] route2 : Executing PATH_1 - exception path
2021-05-06 12:43:18.575 INFO 13956 --- [ #4 - Multicast] route2 : Starting exception throw
2021-05-06 12:43:18.578 INFO 13956 --- [ #4 - Multicast] route2 : Exception handler invoked
2021-05-06 12:43:18.579 INFO 13956 --- [ #4 - Multicast] c.e.d.m.SimpleFlowMergeAggregator : Inside aggregator {"data" : "err"}
2021-05-06 12:43:19.575 INFO 13956 --- [ #3 - Multicast] route3 : Executing PATH_2 - success path
2021-05-06 12:43:21.576 INFO 13956 --- [ #3 - Multicast] route3 : PATH_2
2021-05-06 12:43:21.576 INFO 13956 --- [ #3 - Multicast] c.e.d.m.SimpleFlowMergeAggregator : Inside aggregator DATA_FROM_PATH_2
What could take you by a surprise?
When the multicast completes aggregating exchanges from child branches, one might intermittently note that it stops routing the remaining processors (those two additional log and a transform steps in the above example). On execution tracing exercise, you will notice this happens in a special scenario when the very first exchange which arrives in the aggregator (from the first completed child branch) had encountered an exception during its course or/and was handled via onException
flows. On the flip side, if the first exchange was successful and even though all the remaining ones experienced a failure, it continued routing the remaining processors/steps.
Analysis
To understand this better let’s deep dive into the open source codebase. Check out PipelineProcessor.java
(part of camel-core-processors
module). The following section of code in the class Pipeline
evaluates after every user processor (user added steps in a Camel flow) on whether it should continue routing to the next processor.
@Override
public void run() {
boolean stop = exchange.isRouteStop();
int num = index;
boolean more = num < size;
boolean first = num == 0;
if (!stop && more && (first || continueProcessing(exchange, "so breaking out of pipeline", LOG))) {
// prepare for next run
if (exchange.hasOut()) {
exchange.setIn(exchange.getOut());
exchange.setOut(null);
}
// get the next processor
AsyncProcessor processor = processors.get(index++);
processor.process(exchange, this);
} else {
// copyResults is needed in case MEP is OUT and the message is not an OUT message
ExchangeHelper.copyResults(exchange, exchange);
// logging nextExchange as it contains the exchange that might have altered the payload and since
// we are logging the completion if will be confusing if we log the original instead
// we could also consider logging the original and the nextExchange then we have *before* and *after* snapshots
if (LOG.isTraceEnabled()) {
LOG.trace("Processing complete for exchangeId: {} >>> {}", exchange.getExchangeId(), exchange);
}
AsyncCallback cb = callback;
taskFactory.release(this);
reactiveExecutor.schedule(cb);
}
}
This decision is made inside the if block
if (!stop && more && (first || continueProcessing(exchange, "so breaking out of pipeline", LOG)))
The Pipeline stops routing to next processor under following 3 conditions If previous processors have marked route stop on the exchange object.
boolean stop = exchange.isRouteStop();
There are no more processors in the pipeline
boolean more = num < size;
PipelineHelper.continueProcessing()
evaluates to false
when an exchange encounters any java exception during the course of routing and gets handled via exception handling routines. Refer the implementation code below
public final class PipelineHelper {
public static boolean continueProcessing(Exchange exchange, String message, Logger log) {
ExtendedExchange ee = (ExtendedExchange) exchange;
boolean stop = ee.isFailed() || ee.isRollbackOnly() || ee.isRollbackOnlyLast()
|| (ee.isErrorHandlerHandledSet() && ee.isErrorHandlerHandled());
if (stop) {
if (log.isDebugEnabled()) {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
sb.append("Message exchange has failed: ").append(message).append(" for exchange: ").append(exchange);
if (exchange.isRollbackOnly() || exchange.isRollbackOnlyLast()) {
sb.append(" Marked as rollback only.");
}
if (exchange.getException() != null) {
sb.append(" Exception: ").append(exchange.getException());
}
if (ee.isErrorHandlerHandledSet() && ee.isErrorHandlerHandled()) {
sb.append(" Handled by the error handler.");
}
log.debug(sb.toString());
}
return false;
}
if (ee.isRouteStop()) {
if (log.isDebugEnabled()) {
log.debug("ExchangeId: {} is marked to stop routing: {}", exchange.getExchangeId(), exchange);
}
return false;
}
return true;
}
}
Well, now let’s re-visit our use case. What if you still want to continue routing?
From our above aggregator, you will notice that the very first exchange which arrives in aggregator becomes the base exchange on which the aggregator continues to pile up body content (with incoming results from other child routes). In fact, a lot of Camel users follow this pattern of writing an aggregator strategy. Unfortunately, if done this way, the state variables set on the Exchange object during exception handling get carried forward to the next evaluation point in Pipeline and qualify to stop routing.
Solution
There are many ways a user could neutralize the states set by the exception handling framework. However, for the scope of this article, we chose the following strategy. - If the first child route exchange never encountered an exception, then continue processing the rest of the aggregation cycle as usual. - If the first child encountered an exception, then introspect the incoming exchanges for success case. If found, shift the base to be the first successful exchange and move the aggregated results on to it and continue the rest of the aggregation lifecycle as usual.
Updated AggregationStrategy
:
public class SimpleFlowMergeAggregator implements AggregationStrategy {
private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(SimpleFlowMergeAggregator.class.getName());
@Override
public Exchange aggregate(Exchange oldExchange, Exchange newExchange) {
LOGGER.info("Inside aggregator " + newExchange.getIn().getBody());
if(oldExchange == null) {
String data = newExchange.getIn().getBody(String.class);
List<String> aggregatedDataList = new ArrayList<>();
aggregatedDataList.add(data);
newExchange.getIn().setBody(aggregatedDataList);
return newExchange;
}
if(hadException(oldExchange)) {
if(!hadException(newExchange)) {
// aggregate and swap the base
LOGGER.info("Found new exchange with success. swapping the base exchange");
List<String> oldData = oldExchange.getIn().getBody(List.class);
oldData.add(newExchange.getIn().getBody(String.class));
newExchange.getIn().setBody(oldData); // swapped the base here
return newExchange;
}
}
List<String> oldData = oldExchange.getIn().getBody(List.class);
oldData.add(newExchange.getIn().getBody(String.class));
oldExchange.getIn().setBody(oldData);
return oldExchange;
}
private boolean hadException(Exchange exchange) {
if(exchange.isFailed()) {
return true;
}
if(exchange.isRollbackOnly()) {
return true;
}
if(exchange.isRollbackOnlyLast()) {
return true;
}
if(((ExtendedExchange)exchange).isErrorHandlerHandledSet()
&& ((ExtendedExchange)exchange).isErrorHandlerHandled()) {
return true;
}
return false;
}
}
2021-05-06 12:46:19.122 INFO 2576 --- [qtp174245837-45] route1 : received request
2021-05-06 12:46:19.123 INFO 2576 --- [qtp174245837-45] route1 : Entering multicast
2021-05-06 12:46:19.130 INFO 2576 --- [ #3 - Multicast] route2 : Executing PATH_1 - exception path
2021-05-06 12:46:19.130 INFO 2576 --- [ #3 - Multicast] route2 : Starting exception throw
2021-05-06 12:46:19.134 INFO 2576 --- [ #3 - Multicast] route2 : Exception handler invoked
2021-05-06 12:46:19.135 INFO 2576 --- [ #3 - Multicast] c.e.d.m.SimpleFlowMergeAggregator : Inside aggregator {"data" : "err"}
2021-05-06 12:46:20.130 INFO 2576 --- [ #4 - Multicast] route3 : Executing PATH_2 - success path
2021-05-06 12:46:22.132 INFO 2576 --- [ #4 - Multicast] route3 : PATH_2
2021-05-06 12:46:22.132 INFO 2576 --- [ #4 - Multicast] c.e.d.m.SimpleFlowMergeAggregator : Inside aggregator DATA_FROM_PATH_2
2021-05-06 12:46:22.132 INFO 2576 --- [ #4 - Multicast] c.e.d.m.SimpleFlowMergeAggregator : Found new exchange with success. swapping the base exchange
2021-05-06 12:46:22.133 INFO 2576 --- [ #4 - Multicast] route1 : Aggregated results {"data" : "err"},DATA_FROM_PATH_2
2021-05-06 12:46:22.133 INFO 2576 --- [ #4 - Multicast] route1 : Another log
With the new aggregator implementation, you can now see the exchange getting routed down to the remaining processors.
Hope this article helps users who encounter this issue.