Hmmm... yeah, I like this suggestion. It may be just what we need here!
Thanks!

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Gert Vanthienen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Jon,
>
> How about if we enhance the file consumer to keep track of files that have
> already been processed instead of using a timestamp?  The timestamp approach
> is a bit error-prone (just touching the file by accident can set it off
> again).
> If we provide multiple implementations for the storage mechanism to keep
> this information, we can cover a lot of use cases (similar to the message id
> store for an idempotent consumer):
> - an in-memory store for testing purposes
> - a file-based implementation for basic production environments
> - a database- or ldap-backed implementation for clustered environments,
> where a file can arrive through multiple directories
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert
>
> Jon Anstey schreef:
>
>  The algorithm that checks whether a file should be consumed based on
>> timestamp has been deprecated for a while now (see
>> http://activemq.apache.org/camel/file.html). I've removed this on my
>> local
>> branch only to realize that it introduces a bit of an ugly problem...
>> essentially since files will be processed always (modified or not) in the
>> case of noop=true or if a fault has been set, the same file will be
>> processed over and over again... not good!
>>
>> The original intent of removing the timestamp checking was to simplify the
>> consumer. I think that in trying to get around this new issue we may make
>> it
>> even more complicated!
>>
>> I'm wondering if there is a simple solution to this that I'm just not
>> seeing
>> yet or if maybe this issue was discussed before...
>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
Jon

http://janstey.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to