Two way RMI with Spring backed by a message queueSpring Integration: Hooking web services to a FIFO queueWhich messaging queue for user messagesUnique ids for jobs in a message queue?Spring JMS - redelivery by sending message back to same queue instead of rollback transactionIs there a way to send/receive Tcp messages without sustaining a connection and without reopening a connection each time?java spring rabbitMQ send to many queuesJMS queue - 10 second pause between sending and receiving object messageMessage queue architecture (client to web server to worker and back)Spring and JMS. Separate queue for every client application. Is it right approach?How to communicate from REST to message queue

How do ohm meters measure high resistances?

Early 2000s movie about time travel, protagonist travels back to save girlfriend, then into multiple points in future

Can European countries bypass the EU and make their own individual trade deal with the U.S.?

How can I deal with extreme temperatures in a hotel room?

Robots in a spaceship

Why isn't UDP with reliability (implemented at Application layer) a substitute of TCP?

if a USA citizen marries a foreign citizen who has kid from previous marriage

Why doesn't SpaceX land boosters in Africa?

List Manipulation : a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h into a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h

Copy group of files (Filename*) to backup (Filename*.bak)

How does mmorpg store data?

What is the Japanese name for the conventional shoelace knot?

Why were the first airplanes "backwards"?

Why wasn't EBCDIC designed with contiguous alphanumeric characters?

Ways to get SMD resistors from a strip

Cooking a nice pan seared steak for picky eaters

What do you call a notepad used to keep a record?

Translation of the Sator Square

Why was Pan Am Flight 103 flying over Lockerbie?

What game is this character in the Pixels movie from?

How do I present a future free of gender stereotypes without being jarring or overpowering the narrative?

Why did the Apple //e make a hideous noise if you inserted the disk upside down?

Why would anyone even use a Portkey?

If two black hole event horizons overlap (touch) can they ever separate again?



Two way RMI with Spring backed by a message queue


Spring Integration: Hooking web services to a FIFO queueWhich messaging queue for user messagesUnique ids for jobs in a message queue?Spring JMS - redelivery by sending message back to same queue instead of rollback transactionIs there a way to send/receive Tcp messages without sustaining a connection and without reopening a connection each time?java spring rabbitMQ send to many queuesJMS queue - 10 second pause between sending and receiving object messageMessage queue architecture (client to web server to worker and back)Spring and JMS. Separate queue for every client application. Is it right approach?How to communicate from REST to message queue






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








-1















The system consists of 1 or more clients and a single server. Each client is added manually and provided with an identifier (client.id). Each client can send messages to the server. The server can send messages to each client. All messages can be divided into two groups: with an answer and without.



For example some signatures:



  • CompletableFuture<Response> call(Request requestToServer)

  • void execute(Data dataToSend)

where Response, Request, and Data are my POJO.



So, I need some sort of RMI for implementing message communication between the server and clients.



Requirements:



  1. The server must be able to identify a client by its id client.id when processing a message, but the client, before sending that message, should not directly fill this identifier;

  2. Messages should be POJO;

  3. Ability to answer to a message with an exception;

  4. Event-driven handlers (like @RabbitListener) - several handlers - spring bean per incoming message type, with or without return type. A handler should be resolved automatically, based on incoming message type;

  5. Backed by RabbitMQ or ArtemisMQ;

  6. Single service for sending messages from the server to clients: client id should be provided when sending a message. Example: void sendToClient(int clientId, Data dataToClient).

What I've tried to set up this method of communication:



  1. Spring Integration
    My own gateway with completable future - great. Also, can enrich message headers with client.id - great. But I didn't find an appropriate way to handle an incoming message and being able to answer it. Tried to publish an ApplicationEvent, but all event handlers have a void return type. So, my idea here is to get correlationId and send back message, providing that correlationId - that doesn't look like a clear solution.



  2. RabbitListener/RabbitTemplate
    Cons:



    • A lot of code to setup RabbitTemplate to send and receive messages;

    • Need to manually setup request and reply queues and bindings;

    • problem with resolving client.id inside @RabbitHandler.



  3. AmqpProxyFactoryBean
    The closest result to my needs, but several problems, that I cannot solve:



    • Resolve client.id on message handler;

    • Single handler per service interface method.


So, I need a lightweight solution to build up communication between services, backed by a message queue. It should be easy to add additional message type - declare the class, add the handler to the consumer and create an object of that class and send it from the producer.



But maybe I'm completely wrong, about services communication? Maybe I should not use message queue for that purpose?










share|improve this question
























  • This is all very confused. Either you want RMI or you want message queues. They are completely different programming paradigms. JMS has a listener-style API. RMI has a method-invocation-style API. You need to make up your mind which it is you want. You can't have both.

    – user207421
    Mar 25 at 16:29











  • Thanks, I think, it would be more close to my question, if I change term RMI to RPC in this context.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:05

















-1















The system consists of 1 or more clients and a single server. Each client is added manually and provided with an identifier (client.id). Each client can send messages to the server. The server can send messages to each client. All messages can be divided into two groups: with an answer and without.



For example some signatures:



  • CompletableFuture<Response> call(Request requestToServer)

  • void execute(Data dataToSend)

where Response, Request, and Data are my POJO.



So, I need some sort of RMI for implementing message communication between the server and clients.



Requirements:



  1. The server must be able to identify a client by its id client.id when processing a message, but the client, before sending that message, should not directly fill this identifier;

  2. Messages should be POJO;

  3. Ability to answer to a message with an exception;

  4. Event-driven handlers (like @RabbitListener) - several handlers - spring bean per incoming message type, with or without return type. A handler should be resolved automatically, based on incoming message type;

  5. Backed by RabbitMQ or ArtemisMQ;

  6. Single service for sending messages from the server to clients: client id should be provided when sending a message. Example: void sendToClient(int clientId, Data dataToClient).

What I've tried to set up this method of communication:



  1. Spring Integration
    My own gateway with completable future - great. Also, can enrich message headers with client.id - great. But I didn't find an appropriate way to handle an incoming message and being able to answer it. Tried to publish an ApplicationEvent, but all event handlers have a void return type. So, my idea here is to get correlationId and send back message, providing that correlationId - that doesn't look like a clear solution.



  2. RabbitListener/RabbitTemplate
    Cons:



    • A lot of code to setup RabbitTemplate to send and receive messages;

    • Need to manually setup request and reply queues and bindings;

    • problem with resolving client.id inside @RabbitHandler.



  3. AmqpProxyFactoryBean
    The closest result to my needs, but several problems, that I cannot solve:



    • Resolve client.id on message handler;

    • Single handler per service interface method.


So, I need a lightweight solution to build up communication between services, backed by a message queue. It should be easy to add additional message type - declare the class, add the handler to the consumer and create an object of that class and send it from the producer.



But maybe I'm completely wrong, about services communication? Maybe I should not use message queue for that purpose?










share|improve this question
























  • This is all very confused. Either you want RMI or you want message queues. They are completely different programming paradigms. JMS has a listener-style API. RMI has a method-invocation-style API. You need to make up your mind which it is you want. You can't have both.

    – user207421
    Mar 25 at 16:29











  • Thanks, I think, it would be more close to my question, if I change term RMI to RPC in this context.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:05













-1












-1








-1








The system consists of 1 or more clients and a single server. Each client is added manually and provided with an identifier (client.id). Each client can send messages to the server. The server can send messages to each client. All messages can be divided into two groups: with an answer and without.



For example some signatures:



  • CompletableFuture<Response> call(Request requestToServer)

  • void execute(Data dataToSend)

where Response, Request, and Data are my POJO.



So, I need some sort of RMI for implementing message communication between the server and clients.



Requirements:



  1. The server must be able to identify a client by its id client.id when processing a message, but the client, before sending that message, should not directly fill this identifier;

  2. Messages should be POJO;

  3. Ability to answer to a message with an exception;

  4. Event-driven handlers (like @RabbitListener) - several handlers - spring bean per incoming message type, with or without return type. A handler should be resolved automatically, based on incoming message type;

  5. Backed by RabbitMQ or ArtemisMQ;

  6. Single service for sending messages from the server to clients: client id should be provided when sending a message. Example: void sendToClient(int clientId, Data dataToClient).

What I've tried to set up this method of communication:



  1. Spring Integration
    My own gateway with completable future - great. Also, can enrich message headers with client.id - great. But I didn't find an appropriate way to handle an incoming message and being able to answer it. Tried to publish an ApplicationEvent, but all event handlers have a void return type. So, my idea here is to get correlationId and send back message, providing that correlationId - that doesn't look like a clear solution.



  2. RabbitListener/RabbitTemplate
    Cons:



    • A lot of code to setup RabbitTemplate to send and receive messages;

    • Need to manually setup request and reply queues and bindings;

    • problem with resolving client.id inside @RabbitHandler.



  3. AmqpProxyFactoryBean
    The closest result to my needs, but several problems, that I cannot solve:



    • Resolve client.id on message handler;

    • Single handler per service interface method.


So, I need a lightweight solution to build up communication between services, backed by a message queue. It should be easy to add additional message type - declare the class, add the handler to the consumer and create an object of that class and send it from the producer.



But maybe I'm completely wrong, about services communication? Maybe I should not use message queue for that purpose?










share|improve this question
















The system consists of 1 or more clients and a single server. Each client is added manually and provided with an identifier (client.id). Each client can send messages to the server. The server can send messages to each client. All messages can be divided into two groups: with an answer and without.



For example some signatures:



  • CompletableFuture<Response> call(Request requestToServer)

  • void execute(Data dataToSend)

where Response, Request, and Data are my POJO.



So, I need some sort of RMI for implementing message communication between the server and clients.



Requirements:



  1. The server must be able to identify a client by its id client.id when processing a message, but the client, before sending that message, should not directly fill this identifier;

  2. Messages should be POJO;

  3. Ability to answer to a message with an exception;

  4. Event-driven handlers (like @RabbitListener) - several handlers - spring bean per incoming message type, with or without return type. A handler should be resolved automatically, based on incoming message type;

  5. Backed by RabbitMQ or ArtemisMQ;

  6. Single service for sending messages from the server to clients: client id should be provided when sending a message. Example: void sendToClient(int clientId, Data dataToClient).

What I've tried to set up this method of communication:



  1. Spring Integration
    My own gateway with completable future - great. Also, can enrich message headers with client.id - great. But I didn't find an appropriate way to handle an incoming message and being able to answer it. Tried to publish an ApplicationEvent, but all event handlers have a void return type. So, my idea here is to get correlationId and send back message, providing that correlationId - that doesn't look like a clear solution.



  2. RabbitListener/RabbitTemplate
    Cons:



    • A lot of code to setup RabbitTemplate to send and receive messages;

    • Need to manually setup request and reply queues and bindings;

    • problem with resolving client.id inside @RabbitHandler.



  3. AmqpProxyFactoryBean
    The closest result to my needs, but several problems, that I cannot solve:



    • Resolve client.id on message handler;

    • Single handler per service interface method.


So, I need a lightweight solution to build up communication between services, backed by a message queue. It should be easy to add additional message type - declare the class, add the handler to the consumer and create an object of that class and send it from the producer.



But maybe I'm completely wrong, about services communication? Maybe I should not use message queue for that purpose?







java spring message-queue rmi mq






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 25 at 16:03









Ali Azim

11813 bronze badges




11813 bronze badges










asked Mar 25 at 14:52









jDekjDek

391 silver badge6 bronze badges




391 silver badge6 bronze badges












  • This is all very confused. Either you want RMI or you want message queues. They are completely different programming paradigms. JMS has a listener-style API. RMI has a method-invocation-style API. You need to make up your mind which it is you want. You can't have both.

    – user207421
    Mar 25 at 16:29











  • Thanks, I think, it would be more close to my question, if I change term RMI to RPC in this context.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:05

















  • This is all very confused. Either you want RMI or you want message queues. They are completely different programming paradigms. JMS has a listener-style API. RMI has a method-invocation-style API. You need to make up your mind which it is you want. You can't have both.

    – user207421
    Mar 25 at 16:29











  • Thanks, I think, it would be more close to my question, if I change term RMI to RPC in this context.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:05
















This is all very confused. Either you want RMI or you want message queues. They are completely different programming paradigms. JMS has a listener-style API. RMI has a method-invocation-style API. You need to make up your mind which it is you want. You can't have both.

– user207421
Mar 25 at 16:29





This is all very confused. Either you want RMI or you want message queues. They are completely different programming paradigms. JMS has a listener-style API. RMI has a method-invocation-style API. You need to make up your mind which it is you want. You can't have both.

– user207421
Mar 25 at 16:29













Thanks, I think, it would be more close to my question, if I change term RMI to RPC in this context.

– jDek
Mar 27 at 8:05





Thanks, I think, it would be more close to my question, if I change term RMI to RPC in this context.

– jDek
Mar 27 at 8:05












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0














Well using a message queue or message broker like RabbitMQ is a perfectly valid solution. But you have to think whether it is what you actually need.



A message broker allows you to decouple the producers and consumers of messages. It also allows you to introduce a level of fault tolerance. If the consumer is not available temporarily the message is not lost. However, it also means that if a reply is expected the producer of the message might incorrectly think that the other end has processed its request and keep waiting for a reply. Message brokers also often offer some kind of guarantee, like once-and-only-once, or at-least-once, and also policies how to handle undeliverable messages (like dead letter queues), time-to-live, and various routing capabilities (like consistent hash based routing). In your case, you will probably have to route by some header value carrying your client.id if your server-originated messages are to reach one client only.



If you don't care about any of these features and just want a communications fabric, maybe going for something a bit different might make more sense. For example Akka offers actor-based distributed communication.



If what is bothering you is just the cleanliness of the solution, or the amount of boilerplate, maybe having a look at other implementations might help. You might want to have a look at the Reactive Streams API implementation for RabbitMQ, which should be a bit more abstract.






share|improve this answer























  • Thanks, that make sense for me. Akka is a quite interesting solution, but I don't want to use any reactivity in the project - I don't have enought knowlege about this. But for now I'm digging into gRPC as a solution to my problem.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:10











  • Well plain Akka doesn't have to do with reactivity as such. The reactive streams implementation on top of Akka came after. Akka is just an actor based framework to send messages and have workers consume them. Pretty much like rabbitmq got a reactive streams abstraction implemented for it. gRPC is cool too and performant. But it is not a message broker as such.

    – jbx
    Mar 31 at 11:39










Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55340560%2ftwo-way-rmi-with-spring-backed-by-a-message-queue%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0














Well using a message queue or message broker like RabbitMQ is a perfectly valid solution. But you have to think whether it is what you actually need.



A message broker allows you to decouple the producers and consumers of messages. It also allows you to introduce a level of fault tolerance. If the consumer is not available temporarily the message is not lost. However, it also means that if a reply is expected the producer of the message might incorrectly think that the other end has processed its request and keep waiting for a reply. Message brokers also often offer some kind of guarantee, like once-and-only-once, or at-least-once, and also policies how to handle undeliverable messages (like dead letter queues), time-to-live, and various routing capabilities (like consistent hash based routing). In your case, you will probably have to route by some header value carrying your client.id if your server-originated messages are to reach one client only.



If you don't care about any of these features and just want a communications fabric, maybe going for something a bit different might make more sense. For example Akka offers actor-based distributed communication.



If what is bothering you is just the cleanliness of the solution, or the amount of boilerplate, maybe having a look at other implementations might help. You might want to have a look at the Reactive Streams API implementation for RabbitMQ, which should be a bit more abstract.






share|improve this answer























  • Thanks, that make sense for me. Akka is a quite interesting solution, but I don't want to use any reactivity in the project - I don't have enought knowlege about this. But for now I'm digging into gRPC as a solution to my problem.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:10











  • Well plain Akka doesn't have to do with reactivity as such. The reactive streams implementation on top of Akka came after. Akka is just an actor based framework to send messages and have workers consume them. Pretty much like rabbitmq got a reactive streams abstraction implemented for it. gRPC is cool too and performant. But it is not a message broker as such.

    – jbx
    Mar 31 at 11:39















0














Well using a message queue or message broker like RabbitMQ is a perfectly valid solution. But you have to think whether it is what you actually need.



A message broker allows you to decouple the producers and consumers of messages. It also allows you to introduce a level of fault tolerance. If the consumer is not available temporarily the message is not lost. However, it also means that if a reply is expected the producer of the message might incorrectly think that the other end has processed its request and keep waiting for a reply. Message brokers also often offer some kind of guarantee, like once-and-only-once, or at-least-once, and also policies how to handle undeliverable messages (like dead letter queues), time-to-live, and various routing capabilities (like consistent hash based routing). In your case, you will probably have to route by some header value carrying your client.id if your server-originated messages are to reach one client only.



If you don't care about any of these features and just want a communications fabric, maybe going for something a bit different might make more sense. For example Akka offers actor-based distributed communication.



If what is bothering you is just the cleanliness of the solution, or the amount of boilerplate, maybe having a look at other implementations might help. You might want to have a look at the Reactive Streams API implementation for RabbitMQ, which should be a bit more abstract.






share|improve this answer























  • Thanks, that make sense for me. Akka is a quite interesting solution, but I don't want to use any reactivity in the project - I don't have enought knowlege about this. But for now I'm digging into gRPC as a solution to my problem.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:10











  • Well plain Akka doesn't have to do with reactivity as such. The reactive streams implementation on top of Akka came after. Akka is just an actor based framework to send messages and have workers consume them. Pretty much like rabbitmq got a reactive streams abstraction implemented for it. gRPC is cool too and performant. But it is not a message broker as such.

    – jbx
    Mar 31 at 11:39













0












0








0







Well using a message queue or message broker like RabbitMQ is a perfectly valid solution. But you have to think whether it is what you actually need.



A message broker allows you to decouple the producers and consumers of messages. It also allows you to introduce a level of fault tolerance. If the consumer is not available temporarily the message is not lost. However, it also means that if a reply is expected the producer of the message might incorrectly think that the other end has processed its request and keep waiting for a reply. Message brokers also often offer some kind of guarantee, like once-and-only-once, or at-least-once, and also policies how to handle undeliverable messages (like dead letter queues), time-to-live, and various routing capabilities (like consistent hash based routing). In your case, you will probably have to route by some header value carrying your client.id if your server-originated messages are to reach one client only.



If you don't care about any of these features and just want a communications fabric, maybe going for something a bit different might make more sense. For example Akka offers actor-based distributed communication.



If what is bothering you is just the cleanliness of the solution, or the amount of boilerplate, maybe having a look at other implementations might help. You might want to have a look at the Reactive Streams API implementation for RabbitMQ, which should be a bit more abstract.






share|improve this answer













Well using a message queue or message broker like RabbitMQ is a perfectly valid solution. But you have to think whether it is what you actually need.



A message broker allows you to decouple the producers and consumers of messages. It also allows you to introduce a level of fault tolerance. If the consumer is not available temporarily the message is not lost. However, it also means that if a reply is expected the producer of the message might incorrectly think that the other end has processed its request and keep waiting for a reply. Message brokers also often offer some kind of guarantee, like once-and-only-once, or at-least-once, and also policies how to handle undeliverable messages (like dead letter queues), time-to-live, and various routing capabilities (like consistent hash based routing). In your case, you will probably have to route by some header value carrying your client.id if your server-originated messages are to reach one client only.



If you don't care about any of these features and just want a communications fabric, maybe going for something a bit different might make more sense. For example Akka offers actor-based distributed communication.



If what is bothering you is just the cleanliness of the solution, or the amount of boilerplate, maybe having a look at other implementations might help. You might want to have a look at the Reactive Streams API implementation for RabbitMQ, which should be a bit more abstract.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Mar 25 at 15:07









jbxjbx

12.7k10 gold badges62 silver badges115 bronze badges




12.7k10 gold badges62 silver badges115 bronze badges












  • Thanks, that make sense for me. Akka is a quite interesting solution, but I don't want to use any reactivity in the project - I don't have enought knowlege about this. But for now I'm digging into gRPC as a solution to my problem.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:10











  • Well plain Akka doesn't have to do with reactivity as such. The reactive streams implementation on top of Akka came after. Akka is just an actor based framework to send messages and have workers consume them. Pretty much like rabbitmq got a reactive streams abstraction implemented for it. gRPC is cool too and performant. But it is not a message broker as such.

    – jbx
    Mar 31 at 11:39

















  • Thanks, that make sense for me. Akka is a quite interesting solution, but I don't want to use any reactivity in the project - I don't have enought knowlege about this. But for now I'm digging into gRPC as a solution to my problem.

    – jDek
    Mar 27 at 8:10











  • Well plain Akka doesn't have to do with reactivity as such. The reactive streams implementation on top of Akka came after. Akka is just an actor based framework to send messages and have workers consume them. Pretty much like rabbitmq got a reactive streams abstraction implemented for it. gRPC is cool too and performant. But it is not a message broker as such.

    – jbx
    Mar 31 at 11:39
















Thanks, that make sense for me. Akka is a quite interesting solution, but I don't want to use any reactivity in the project - I don't have enought knowlege about this. But for now I'm digging into gRPC as a solution to my problem.

– jDek
Mar 27 at 8:10





Thanks, that make sense for me. Akka is a quite interesting solution, but I don't want to use any reactivity in the project - I don't have enought knowlege about this. But for now I'm digging into gRPC as a solution to my problem.

– jDek
Mar 27 at 8:10













Well plain Akka doesn't have to do with reactivity as such. The reactive streams implementation on top of Akka came after. Akka is just an actor based framework to send messages and have workers consume them. Pretty much like rabbitmq got a reactive streams abstraction implemented for it. gRPC is cool too and performant. But it is not a message broker as such.

– jbx
Mar 31 at 11:39





Well plain Akka doesn't have to do with reactivity as such. The reactive streams implementation on top of Akka came after. Akka is just an actor based framework to send messages and have workers consume them. Pretty much like rabbitmq got a reactive streams abstraction implemented for it. gRPC is cool too and performant. But it is not a message broker as such.

– jbx
Mar 31 at 11:39








Got a question that you can’t ask on public Stack Overflow? Learn more about sharing private information with Stack Overflow for Teams.







Got a question that you can’t ask on public Stack Overflow? Learn more about sharing private information with Stack Overflow for Teams.



















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55340560%2ftwo-way-rmi-with-spring-backed-by-a-message-queue%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Kamusi Yaliyomo Aina za kamusi | Muundo wa kamusi | Faida za kamusi | Dhima ya picha katika kamusi | Marejeo | Tazama pia | Viungo vya nje | UrambazajiKuhusu kamusiGo-SwahiliWiki-KamusiKamusi ya Kiswahili na Kiingerezakuihariri na kuongeza habari

SQL error code 1064 with creating Laravel foreign keysForeign key constraints: When to use ON UPDATE and ON DELETEDropping column with foreign key Laravel error: General error: 1025 Error on renameLaravel SQL Can't create tableLaravel Migration foreign key errorLaravel php artisan migrate:refresh giving a syntax errorSQLSTATE[42S01]: Base table or view already exists or Base table or view already exists: 1050 Tableerror in migrating laravel file to xampp serverSyntax error or access violation: 1064:syntax to use near 'unsigned not null, modelName varchar(191) not null, title varchar(191) not nLaravel cannot create new table field in mysqlLaravel 5.7:Last migration creates table but is not registered in the migration table

은진 송씨 목차 역사 본관 분파 인물 조선 왕실과의 인척 관계 집성촌 항렬자 인구 같이 보기 각주 둘러보기 메뉴은진 송씨세종실록 149권, 지리지 충청도 공주목 은진현