Wolverine 1.4.0 was released last week (and a smaller 1.5.0, with a medium sized 1.6.0 coming Monday). The biggest new feature was a brand new option to use Microsoft Sql Server (or Azure Sql) as a durable message transport with Wolverine.

Let’s say your system is already using Sql Server for persistence, you need some durable, asynchronous messaging, and wouldn’t it be nice to not have to introduce any new infrastructure into the mix? Assuming you’ve decided to also use Wolverine, you can get started with this approach by adding the WolverineFx.SqlServer Nuget to your application:

dotnet add package WolverineFx.SqlServer

Here’s a sample application bootstrapping that shows the inclusion and configuration of Sql Server-backed queueing:

using var host = await Host.CreateDefaultBuilder()
    .UseWolverine((context, opts) =>
    {
        var connectionString = context
            .Configuration
            .GetConnectionString("sqlserver");
        
        // This adds both Sql Server backed
        // transactional inbox/outbox support
        // and the messaging transport support
        opts
           .UseSqlServerPersistenceAndTransport(connectionString, "myapp")
            
            // Tell Wolverine to build out all necessary queue or scheduled message
            // tables on demand as needed
            .AutoProvision()
            
            // Option that may be helpful in testing, but probably bad
            // in production!
            .AutoPurgeOnStartup();

        // Use this extension method to create subscriber rules
        opts.PublishAllMessages()
            .ToSqlServerQueue("outbound");

        // Use this to set up queue listeners
        opts.ListenToSqlServerQueue("inbound")

            // Optional circuit breaker usage
            .CircuitBreaker(cb =>
            {
                // fine tune the circuit breaker
                // policies here
            })
            
            // Optionally specify how many messages to 
            // fetch into the listener at any one time
            .MaximumMessagesToReceive(50);
    }).StartAsync();

The Sql Server transport is pretty simple, it basically just supports named queues right now. Here’s a couple useful properties of the transport that will hopefully make it more useful to you:

• Scheduled message delivery is absolutely supported with the Sql Server Transport, and some care was taken to optimize the database load and throughput when using this feature
• Sql Server backed queues can be either “buffered in memory” (Wolverine’s message batching) or be “durable” meaning that the queues are integrated into both the transactional inbox and outbox for durable systems
• Wolverine can build database tables as necessary for the queue much like it does today for the transactional inbox and outbox. Moreover, the configured queue tables are also part of the stateful resource model in the Critter Stack world that provide quite a bit of command line management directly into your application.
• The Sql Server backed queues support Wolverine’s circuit breaker functionality on listeners

This feature is something that folks have asked about in the past, but I’ve always been reticent to try because databases don’t make for great, 1st class queueing mechanisms. That being said, I’m working with a JasperFx Software client who wanted a more robust local queueing mechanism that could handle much more throughput for scheduled messaging, and thus, the new Sql Server Transport was born.

There will be a full fledged PostgreSQL backed queue at some point, and it might be a little more robust even based on some preliminary work from a Wolverine contributor, but that’s probably not an immediate priority.

In Wolverine terminology, an “Endpoint” is the configuration time model for any location or mechanism where Wolverine sends or receives messages, including local Wolverine queues within your application. Think of external resource like a Rabbit MQ exchange or an Amazon SQS queue. The Async API specification refers to this as a channel, and Wolverine may very well change its nomenclature in the future to be consistent with Async API. While there are somewhat different configuration options for a Rabbit MQ exchange versus an Azure Service Bus queue, there are some common elements. For the sake of this post (which is mostly ripped out of the Wolverine documentation), endpoints in Wolverine are processed on one of three modes:

1. Inline – messages are sent immediately, and processed sequentially. While you can parallelize the listeners for better throughput, this is your most likely choice if message delivery order matters to you
2. Buffered – kind of a batched, in memory mode
3. Durable – batched in memory, but also backed every step of the way by Wolverine’s transactional inbox/outbox support

Choosing between these three modes is a matter of balancing throughput and delivery guarantees. With that, here’s a deeper dive into the three modes. Do note though, that not every transport type can support all three modes

Inline Endpoints

Wolverine endpoints come in three basic flavors, with the first being Inline endpoints:

// Configuring a Wolverine application to listen to
// an Azure Service Bus queue with the "Inline" mode
opts.ListenToAzureServiceBusQueue(queueName, q => q.Options.AutoDeleteOnIdle = 5.Minutes()).ProcessInline();

With inline endpoints, as the name implies, calling IMessageBus.SendAsync() immediately sends the message to the external message broker. Likewise, messages received from an external message queue are processed inline before Wolverine acknowledges to the message broker that the message is received.

In the absence of a durable inbox/outbox, using inline endpoints is “safer” in terms of guaranteed delivery. As you might think, using inline agents can bottle neck the message processing, but that can be alleviated by opting into parallel listeners.

Buffered Endpoints

In the second Buffered option, messages are queued locally between the actual external broker and the Wolverine handlers or senders.

To opt into buffering, you use this syntax:

// I overrode the buffering limits just to show
// that they exist for "back pressure"
opts.ListenToAzureServiceBusQueue("incoming")
    .BufferedInMemory(new BufferingLimits(1000, 200));

At runtime, you have a local TPL Dataflow queue between the Wolverine callers and the broker:

On the listening side, buffered endpoints do support back pressure (of sorts) where Wolverine will stop the actual message listener if too many messages are queued in memory to avoid chewing up your application memory. In transports like Amazon SQS that only support batched message sending or receiving, Buffered is the default mode as that facilitates message batching.

Buffered message sending and receiving can lead to higher throughput, and should be considered for cases where messages are ephemeral or expire and throughput is more important than delivery guarantees. The downside is that messages in the in memory queues can be lost in the case of the application shutting down unexpectedly — but Wolverine tries to “drain” the in memory queues on normal application shutdown.

Durable Endpoints

Durable endpoints behave like buffered endpoints, but also use the durable inbox/outbox message storage to create much stronger guarantees about message delivery and processing. You will need to use Durable endpoints in order to truly take advantage of the persistent outbox mechanism in Wolverine. To opt into making an endpoint durable, use this syntax:

// I overrode the buffering limits just to show
// that they exist for "back pressure"
opts.ListenToAzureServiceBusQueue("incoming")
    .UseDurableInbox(new BufferingLimits(1000, 200));

opts.PublishAllMessages().ToAzureServiceBusQueue("outgoing")
    .UseDurableOutbox();

Or use policies to do this in one fell swoop (which may not be what you actually want, but you could do this!):

opts.Policies.UseDurableOutboxOnAllSendingEndpoints();

As shown below, the Durable endpoint option adds an extra step to the Buffered behavior to add database storage of the incoming and outgoing messages:

Outgoing messages are deleted in the durable outbox upon successful sending acknowledgements from the external broker. Likewise, incoming messages are also deleted from the durable inbox upon successful message execution.

The Durable endpoint option makes Wolverine’s local queueing robust enough to use for cases where you need guaranteed processing of messages, but don’t want to use an external broker.

TL;DR: Wolverine message handler signatures can lead to easier unit testing code than comparable “IHandler of T” frameworks.

Most of the time I think you can just allow Wolverine to handle message routing for you with some simple configured rules or conventions. However, once in awhile you’ll need to override those rules and tell Wolverine exactly where those messages should go.

I’ve been working (playing) with Midjourney quite a bit lately trying to make images for the JasperFx Software website. You can try it out to generate images for free, but the image generation gets a lower priority than their paying customers. Using that as an example, let’s say that we were using Wolverine to build our own Midjourney clone. At some point, there’s maybe an asynchronous message handler like this one that takes a request to generate a new image based on the user’s prompt, but routes the actual work to either a higher or lower priority queue based on whether the user is a premium customer:

    public record GenerateImage(string Prompt, Guid ImageId);

    public record ImageRequest(string Prompt, string CustomerId);

    public record ImageGenerated(Guid Id, byte[] Image);

    public class Customer
    {
        public string Id { get; set; }
        public bool PremiumMembership { get; set; }
    }

    public class ImageSaga : Saga
    {
        public Guid Id { get; set; }
        
        public string CustomerId { get; set; }

        public Task Handle(ImageGenerated generated)
        {
            // look up the customer, figure out how to send the
            // image to their client.
            throw new NotImplementedException("Not done yet:)");
            
            MarkCompleted();
        }
    }
    
    public static class GenerateImageHandler
    {
        // I'm assuming the usage of Marten middleware here
        // to handle transactions and the outbox mechanics
        public static async Task HandleAsync(
            ImageRequest request, 
            IDocumentSession session, 
            IMessageBus messageBus,
            CancellationToken cancellationToken)
        {
            var customer = await session
                .LoadAsync<Customer>(request.CustomerId, cancellationToken);

            // I'm starting a new saga to track the state of the 
            // image when we get the callback from the downstream
            // image generation service
            var imageSaga = new ImageSaga();
            session.Insert(imageSaga);

            var outgoing = new GenerateImage(request.Prompt, imageSaga.Id);
            if (customer.PremiumMembership)
            {
                // Send the message to a named endpoint we've configured for the faster
                // processing
                await messageBus.EndpointFor("premium-processing")
                    .SendAsync(outgoing);
            }
            else
            {
                // Send the message to a named endpoint we've configured for slower
                // processing
                await messageBus.EndpointFor("basic-processing")
                    .SendAsync(outgoing);
            }
        }
    }

A couple notes on the code above:

• I’m assuming the usage of Marten for persistence (of course), with the auto transactional middleware policy applied
• I’ve configured a PostgreSQL backed outbox for Wolverine
• It’s likely a slow process, so I’m assuming there’s going to be an asynchronous callback from the actual image generator later. I’m leveraging Wolverine’s stateful saga support to track the customer of the original image for processing later

Wolverine V1.3 dropped today with a little improvement for exactly this scenario (based on some usage by a JasperFx client) so you can use cascading messages instead of having to deal directly with the IMessageBus service. Let’s rewrite the explicit code up above, but this time try to turn the actual routing logic into a pure function that could be easy to unit test:

    public static class GenerateImageHandler
    {
        // Using Wolverine's compound handlers to remove all the asynchronous
        // junk from the main Handle() method
        public static Task<Customer> LoadAsync(
            ImageRequest request, 
            IDocumentSession session,
            CancellationToken cancellationToken)
        {
            return session.LoadAsync<Customer>(request.CustomerId, cancellationToken);
        }
        
        
        public static (RoutedToEndpointMessage<GenerateImage>, ImageSaga) Handle(
            ImageRequest request, 
            Customer customer)
        {

            // I'm starting a new saga to track the state of the 
            // image when we get the callback from the downstream
            // image generation service
            var imageSaga = new ImageSaga
            {
                // I need to assign the image id in memory
                // to make this all work
                Id = CombGuidIdGeneration.NewGuid()
            };

            var outgoing = new GenerateImage(request.Prompt, imageSaga.Id);
            var destination = customer.PremiumMembership ? "premium-processing" : "basic-processing";
            
            return (outgoing.ToEndpoint(destination), imageSaga);
        }
    }

The handler above is the equivalent in functionality to the earlier version. It’s not really that much less code, but I think it’s a bit more declarative. What’s most important to me is the potential for unit testing the decision about where the customer requests go as shown in this fake test:

    [Fact]
    public void should_send_the_request_to_premium_processing_for_premium_customers()
    {
        var request = new ImageRequest("a wolverine ice skating in the country side", "alice");
        var customer = new Customer
        {
            Id = "alice",
            PremiumMembership = true
        };

        var (command, image) = GenerateImageHandler.Handle(request, customer);
        
        command.EndpointName.ShouldBe("premium-processing");
        command.Message.Prompt.ShouldBe(request.Prompt);
        command.Message.ImageId.ShouldBe(image.Id);
        
        image.CustomerId.ShouldBe(request.CustomerId);
    }

What I’m hoping you take away from that code sample is that testing the logic part of the ImageRequest message processing turns into a simple state-based test — meaning that you’re just pushing in the known inputs and measuring the values returned by the method. You’d still need to pair this unit test with a full integration test, but at least you’d know that the routing logic is correct before you wrestle with potential integration issues.