Skip to main content

AsyncApi–Share your message contracts in a language agnostic manner

As most of the systems I’m building are .NET based, I typically use NuGet Packages (published on an internal NuGet repository like Azure Artifacts or MyGet) to share my message contracts between different parts of the system.

The main disadvantage of this approach is that it creates platform coupling and is not a good solution if you are in a polyglot environment using different platforms and programming languages.

What if we could write our message contracts in a language neutral way? That is exactly what AsyncAPI has to offer.

From the AsyncAPI website:

AsyncAPI is an open source initiative that seeks to improve the current state of Event-Driven Architectures (EDA). Our long-term goal is to make working with EDAs as easy as it is to work with REST APIs. That goes from documentation to code generation, from discovery to event management. Most of the processes you apply to your REST APIs nowadays would be applicable to your event-driven/asynchronous APIs too.

To make this happen, the first step has been to create a specification that allows developers, architects, and product managers to define the interfaces of an async API. Much like OpenAPI (fka Swagger) does for REST APIs.

The AsyncAPI specification started as an adaptation of the OpenAPI specification so there are a lot of similarities.

Here is an example payload for one of my projects:

In the example above, we have a ‘Mail Service’ application that is linked to a RabbitMQ broker. The application behaves both as a producer and consumer as it subscribers to ‘SendMailCommand’ messages and publishes ‘MailSentEvent’ messages.

If you want to learn what the different parts mean, check out the great documentation provided here.

The AsyncAPI community has created an Async API studio which allows you to load, edit and view your specifications in a user-friendly way:

 

Popular posts from this blog

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...

Azure DevOps/ GitHub emoji

I’m really bad at remembering emoji’s. So here is cheat sheet with all emoji’s that can be used in tools that support the github emoji markdown markup: All credits go to rcaviers who created this list.

Cache stampede: when our cache turned against us

While investigating some performance issues, we ran into an ASP.NET Core API that cached a fairly expensive aggregation query for 60 seconds. Under normal load, that was fine: one request rebuilds the cache, everyone else reads from it. Under peak load, dozens of requests would arrive in that same expiry window, all see a cache miss, and all fire the same expensive query in parallel. The database didn't like that. That was the moment when our caching layer stopped helping and started hurting. A burst of requests comes in at the same time, all miss the cache, and all go hammer the database or the downstream API at once. That's a cache stampede . The cache was supposed to protect our backend, and for a few hundred milliseconds it did the opposite. Why this happens IMemoryCache.GetOrCreate (and its async sibling) looks like it protects you, but it doesn't add any locking on its own. Look at the naive version: public async Task<Report> GetReportAsync(string key) ...