Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

channel.go: avoid race condition by synchronizing ch.send calls #499

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

xaka
Copy link

@xaka xaka commented Feb 26, 2021

  • for example calls to Publish and QueueDeclare from multiple goroutines lead to messed up frames and eventual connection failure
  • i tested it by running 25 goroutines with infinite loops and mixing Publish/QueueDeclare calls using the same channel
  • pretty much every call to ch.send needs to be wrapped by ch.m.Lock/ch.m.Unlock

for example calls to Publish and QueueDeclare from multiple goroutines lead to messed up frames and eventual connection failure
@@ -168,6 +168,9 @@ func (ch *Channel) open() error {
// Performs a request/response call for when the message is not NoWait and is
// specified as Synchronous.
func (ch *Channel) call(req message, res ...message) error {
ch.m.Lock()

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't there a lock implemented on the connection object c.sendM before writing to the frame. That should be doing the same thing, right?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is indeed typically done at connection level by various clients. We have to be really careful here as throughput effects of locking on the hot path can be very serious or even catastrophic for some systems.

@michaelklishin
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey folks,

I'm posting this on behalf of the core team.

As you have noticed, this client hasn't seen a lot of activity recently.
Many users are unhappy about that and we fully recognize that it's a popular
library that should be maintained more actively. There are also many community
members who have contributed pull requests and haven't been merged for various reasons.

Because this client has a long tradition of "no breaking public API changes", certain
reasonable changes will likely never be accepted. This is frustrating to those who
have put in their time and effort into trying to improve this library.

We would like to thank @streadway
for developing this client and maintaining it for a decade — that's a remarkable contribution
to the RabbitMQ ecosystem. We this now is a good time to get more contributors
involved.

Team RabbitMQ has adopted a "hard fork" of this client
in order to give the community a place to evolve the API. Several RabbitMQ core team members
will participate but we think it very much should be a community-driven effort.

What do we mean by "hard fork" and what does it mean for you? The entire history of the project
is retained in the new repository but it is not a GitHub fork by design. The license remains the same
2-clause BSD. The contribution process won't change much (except that we hope to review and accept PRs
reasonably quickly).

What does change is that this new fork will accept reasonable breaking API changes according
to Semantic Versioning (or at least our understanding of it). At the moment the API is identical
to that of streadway/amqp but the package name is different. We will begin reviewing PRs
and merging them if they make sense in the upcoming weeks.

If your PR hasn't been accepted or reviewed, you are welcome to re-submit it for rabbitmq/amqp091-go.
RabbitMQ core team members will evaluate the PRs currently open for streadway/amqp as time allows,
and pull those that don't have any conflicts. We cannot promise that every PR would be accepted
but at least we are open to changing the API going forward.

Note that it is a high season for holidays in some parts of the world, so we may be slower
to respond in the next few weeks but otherwise, we are eager to review as many currently open PRs
as practically possible soon.

Thank you for using RabbitMQ and contributing to this client. On behalf of the RabbitMQ core team,
@ChunyiLyu and @michaelklishin.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants