[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-16737?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17374300#comment-17374300
]
Benjamin Graf edited comment on CAMEL-16737 at 7/4/21, 3:31 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~davsclaus],
I think the worker feature introduced in Camel 3.11.0 makes this issue to a bug
since non-synchronous routing leads to endpoint being fired too early. If you
like, I can show an example, but the test cases from CAMEL-16734 should also
fail, too if you order the exchanges in mock:result. But to be honest, I did
not test it myself :)
Benjamin
BTW: Dirty workaround is to set SynchronousExecutorService (Works not in every
case!)
was (Author: graben):
Hi [~davsclaus],
I think the worker feature introduced in Camel 3.11.0 makes this issue to a bug
since non-synchronous routing leads to endpoint being fired too early. If you
like, I can show an example, but the test cases from CAMEL-16734 should also
fail, too if you order the exchanges in mock:result. But to be honest, I did
not test it myself :)
Benjamin
BTW: Dirty workaround is to set SynchronousExecutorService
> camel-core - Transacted vs reactive routing engine
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-16737
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-16737
> Project: Camel
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: camel-core
> Reporter: Claus Ibsen
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.12.0
>
>
> Lets look at if we can make transacted work better with the reactive routing
> engine.
> See CAMEL-16734 and the ticket it mentions for background.
> Maybe we could let the routing engine be aware if a task is under transaction
> and execute it synchronously via its current thread, and ensure any other
> tasks that this thread or exchange is providing to the reactive engine is
> processed under the transaction via that same thread.
> At this movement its the EIP implementation that need to splitup their tasks
> into transacted vs non-transacted which would ideally be avoided.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
