Skip to content

Conversation

mvdbeek
Copy link
Member

@mvdbeek mvdbeek commented Oct 14, 2025

No description provided.

@mvdbeek mvdbeek marked this pull request as draft October 14, 2025 12:41
@jmchilton
Copy link
Member

jmchilton commented Oct 14, 2025

Is calling it a proxy a like common pattern or something I'm missing. I read through the whole PR and I think it is very exciting but I don't understand the messaging. It is a different message communication schema than AMQP but it is a similar idea right? Why is this a proxy but we wouldn't call AMQP a proxy? I would call it like reverse long polling or something instead but I may just be not seeing it through your eyes.

@mvdbeek
Copy link
Member Author

mvdbeek commented Oct 14, 2025

yeah, it's not a exactly a proxy .. messages pass unmodified between pulsar and galaxy and yes, the messages are the same as what we use with amqp modality. pulsar-proxy can also do websockets, and we should probably switch transparently between these when websockets are an option. which direction is reverse in the long polling scheme ?

Do you like one of these ?

  • relay
  • broker
  • HTTP message queue
  • message proxy

long polling is just the modality I've implemented for now, I'd like to keep that a detail and call both the server (what I call pulsar-proxy) and the procedure in the docs the same thing.

@mvdbeek mvdbeek changed the title Add pulsar proxy mode Add pulsar relay mode Oct 20, 2025
@mvdbeek mvdbeek marked this pull request as ready for review October 20, 2025 19:33
@mvdbeek
Copy link
Member Author

mvdbeek commented Oct 20, 2025

Bit of a chicken and egg, but the integration test in galaxyproject/galaxy#21118 passes locally.

@jmchilton jmchilton merged commit 2f57a74 into galaxyproject:master Oct 21, 2025
10 of 14 checks passed
@jmchilton
Copy link
Member

Very exciting! Thank you so much for pushing in this direction - how did Claude do with Pulsar - any lessons learned? Did you make any CLAUDE.md files or anything to help it out?

Comment on lines +241 to +246
1. **Galaxy → Pulsar**: Galaxy posts control messages (job setup, status requests,
kill commands) to the proxy via HTTP POST
2. **Pulsar → Galaxy**: Pulsar polls the proxy via HTTP long-polling to receive
these messages
3. **Pulsar → Galaxy**: Pulsar posts status updates to the proxy
4. **Galaxy → Pulsar**: Galaxy polls the proxy to receive status updates
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should these be:

  1. Galaxy -> proxy
  2. proxy -> Pulsar
  3. Pulsar -> proxy
  4. Proxy -> Galaxy

?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yep, and I thought I changed the language to relay 🤔

@mvdbeek
Copy link
Member Author

mvdbeek commented Oct 21, 2025

I'm rarely using claude.md, I started with this prompt:

Make a plan for an additional communication mode with galaxy via pulsar-proxy. pulsar-proxy is deployed at
0.0.0.0:9000, you can log in with username: admin, password admin1234. The api is documented at
http://0.0.0.0:9000/openapi.json. You can and should still directly communicate with galaxy where possible,
but galaxy can't reach pulsar, so the pulsar code running with galaxy should post messages to pulsar-proxy,
and the pulsar side should read messages either via a websocket connection or long polling.

and then reviewed the plan and let it do its thing. The next prompt was

Is proxy the best description for this new messaging mode ?

😅

@natefoo
Copy link
Member

natefoo commented Oct 21, 2025

Does this retry all message types, or just status updates?

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.

4 participants