On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Sura Monday wrote:
> Hi All,
> I have an exchange pattern like the one shown below:
>
> from("jason:action").inOut("jms:validate);
>
> from("jms:validate").bean(ValidatorBean.class);
>
> At my jason end point, if I print out [endpoint].getExchangePattern(), it
> r
Anyone got that link to the blog post by a swedish company (I think it
was Jayway) that posted a couple of years ago, about the 15+ steps it
took them to figure out how to do a XSLT in Oracle, and that it took 3
lines of simple code in Camel.
Ah I found it here it is:
http://www.jayway.com/2010/05
Hi, can anyone give some really good convincing stuff that why should we use
camel over BPEL? I'm trying to convince somebody here to use camel instead
of oracle SOA 11g that has BPEL engine as so called 'orchestrator'. any
references, materials are good, and especially like to have some input from
There is no exception occurring. And therefore the error handler does
not redeliver anything.
If the timeout is hit on the multicast, then yes the multicast will
aggregate what it currently has, and continue routing.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:37 PM, jimbogaz wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I think I'm mi
Hi All,
I have an exchange pattern like the one shown below:
from("jason:action").inOut("jms:validate);
from("jms:validate").bean(ValidatorBean.class);
At my jason end point, if I print out [endpoint].getExchangePattern(), it
returns inOnly.
Why doesn't getExchangePattern() r
Hi guys,
I'm using WS-BPEL for 5 years and Apache Camel for 3 years. I use them
BOTH. It depends on the use case. If I have to write complex system
integrations then WS-BPEL-based service orchestration is ideal. If I
have to implement service flows then WS-BPEL is simply my number one.
On the othe
Oh, and the asyncCallbackRequestBody call is intentional (I am under the
impression that this is a way to have an InOut route that doesn't block the
initiating thread... my multicast routes will eventually be CXF over JMS
calls).
--
View this message in context:
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.co
Hi all.
I think I'm missing something obvious, but I can't find anything here that
is similar to my problem, or any docs that tell me "it's obvious James you
twerp":
I've put together a route that multicasts to three direct routes, which
simply return setBody type responses. I have intentionally
I want to know who is planning to join ApacheCon EU 2012 in Sinnsheim,
Germany (5th November - 8th November)? We will have 5 talks in the "Camel
in Action" track (one of them is about ActiveMQ and four talks about
Camel)...
Somebody interested in a get together evening event? If so, I would try to
i tried that already :)
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Donald Whytock wrote:
> Camel's a lot cheaper than Oracle...?
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Bing Lu wrote:
> > thanks for the links. I'm trying to convince them why camel is better
> than
> > BPEL in the system integration world, a
Camel's a lot cheaper than Oracle...?
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Bing Lu wrote:
> thanks for the links. I'm trying to convince them why camel is better than
> BPEL in the system integration world, any suggestions welcome
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:37 PM, chris snow wrote:
>
>> you may f
thanks for the links. I'm trying to convince them why camel is better than
BPEL in the system integration world, any suggestions welcome
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:37 PM, chris snow wrote:
> you may find these links useful:
>
>
> http://fusesource.com/apache-camel-conference-2012/videos/camelone-
you may find these links useful:
http://fusesource.com/apache-camel-conference-2012/videos/camelone-2012-kai-wahner-video
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Camel-EAI-patterns-vs-BPEL-processes-td5713573.html
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:25 PM, realice wrote:
> Hi, can anyone give some really good
Hi, can anyone give some really good convincing stuff that why should we use
camel over BPEL? I'm trying to convince somebody here to use camel instead
of oracle SOA 11g that has BPEL engine as so called 'orchestrator'. any
references, materials are good, and especially like to have some input from
+1
Sent from a mobile device
Am 12.09.2012 19:44 schrieb "Pontus Ullgren" :
> Hello,
>
> The way you see it behave is the way it should behave. If you have
> competing consumers on a queue they will consume messages in that way.
>
> If I interpreted your requirement correctly you have messages fr
Hello,
The way you see it behave is the way it should behave. If you have
competing consumers on a queue they will consume messages in that way.
If I interpreted your requirement correctly you have messages from a#
that can only be consumed by c# and messages from b# that can only be
consumed by
Dear friends
I´m facing the folowing problem: I have 2 producers systems sending messages
to 1 jms queue that is consumed by 2 consumers systems. Ignore the VM where
they are.
#a) a producerSystem_1.war has the folowing camelContext:
...
...
#b) a producerSystem_2.war has
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM, wrote:
> The idea is to start up a route to selectively move messages from one queue
> to another based on an expression. This is, as far as I know, the Selective
> Consumer EIP. The idea would be if the filter returns true, move the message
> to the next destinat
I have also have another route that uses this which works correctly...
@Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
from(requestEndpoint).routeId(createRouteId())
.filter(header(headerName).isEqualTo(headerValue))
.to(destinationEndpoint).end(
The idea is to start up a route to selectively move messages from one
queue to another based on an expression. This is, as far as I know, the
Selective Consumer EIP. The idea would be if the filter returns true,
move the message to the next destination otherwise leave it in the
queuethought
And without the filter so its straight from -> to. Does that work for you?
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:26 PM, wrote:
> Thanks for the response Claus,
>
> Here is the routes Description:
>
> EventDrivenConsumerRoute[Endpoint[activemq://queue:esigSigRqst] ->
> Instrumentation:route[UnitOfWork(Route
Thanks for the response Claus,
Here is the routes Description:
EventDrivenConsumerRoute[Endpoint[activemq://queue:esigSigRqst] ->
Instrumentation:route[UnitOfWork(RouteContextProcessor[Channel[Filter[if:
bodyAs[java.lang.String] contains POS do:
Channel[sendTo(Endpoint[activemq://queue:esigSi
Hi,
I have a simple bridging route defined as
The toBean has a WS-Policy attached that demands a UsernameToken.
As per the CXF documentation I try to set the username and password on the
toBean like this:
However, it seems those properties are simply discarded, and the CXF Policy
Intercepto
If the messages gets dequed only, then the expression returns false,
so the message gets dropped.
Make sure the value "content" has been set before the configure method
is invoked.
For example you can do a System out println of content variable from
the configure meyhod. It may be null at the time
Hi
You have already posted about this in another thread. Please dont
start new topics about the same.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:49 PM, balkishore wrote:
> I am caught in this problem for a while now and am not able to figure out how
> to solve it.
>
> I have a client that sends a SOAP request a
I am caught in this problem for a while now and am not able to figure out how
to solve it.
I have a client that sends a SOAP request and gets a SOAP response from the
servers.
I have written a wrote to do a sticky load balance:
from(uri)
.loadBalance().sticky(xpath(query2))
.to(BE1,BE2);
If i a
I created a route that I was trying to use to filter messages from a
destination.
@Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
from(requestEndpoint).routeId(createRouteId())
.filter(body(String.class).contains(content))
.to(destinationEndpoint
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Tim Dudgeon wrote:
> When using the File component to write to a file is it always the message
> body that is written, or is it possible to use an expression (e.g. simple)?
> Of course body can be replaced with new content using an expression, but is
> that the on
Is substring supported in camel by the way?
some thing like this
xpath.compile("substring(string(/*[local-name()='Envelope']/*[local-name()='Header']/*[local-name()='ReplyTo']/*[local-name()='ReferenceParameters']/*[local-name()='ServiceGroupId']/text()),
10)");
Return me an error, saying
org.ap
When using the File component to write to a file is it always the
message body that is written, or is it possible to use an expression
(e.g. simple)?
Of course body can be replaced with new content using an expression, but
is that the only way to do this?
Tim
Hi,
I just created a small java program just to check if my xpath provides me
with the appropriate infromation that I want(i.e the ServiceGroup ID) And I
go the output as
urn:uuid:99A029EBBC70DBEB221347349722532, the term after urn:uuid: is the
session Id.
So are the terms urn:uuid: culprit? Sh
Instead of using camel-cxf component, this is most effective way to do the load
balancing.
I think you can do some tracing work to see if the xpath expression return the
right ServiceGroupID first.
Then we can keep digging if the sticky load balancing is doing its job.
--
Willem Jiang
FuseSo
As *always* with xpath, make sure it works first.
For example set it to a header, and then use the camel tracer / log
component etc. to log it.
Also with xpath the result type is usually some XML type. And thus you
need to set it to "String" if you want just text.
There is a resultType on the xpa
Hi I would like to perform sticky load balncing in apache camel based on the
SOAP session, whcih is embedded in ServiceGroupID node of the first
response.
I wrote a small route as follow:
from(uri)
.loadBalance().sticky(xpath(query).namespaces(env).namespaces(wsa).namespaces(ax))
.to(BE1,BE2);
W
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Tim Dudgeon wrote:
> OK, thanks. So I think I get it now. Some params need defining on the 'from'
> side and some on the 'to' side. And the order the queue appears in the
> routes is important. So this seems to work for me. Is this correct?
>
> from('seda:i
OK, thanks. So I think I get it now. Some params need defining on the
'from' side and some on the 'to' side. And the order the queue appears
in the routes is important. So this seems to work for me. Is this correct?
from('seda:insert?concurrentConsumers=2&size=3')
.delay
36 matches
Mail list logo
