ayed nearly the same.
>
> Also with VM instead of TCP the results where the same.
>
> What did you meant with two inOnly routes instead of one InOut?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Claus Ibsen [mailto:claus.ib...@gmail.com]
> Sent: terça-feira, 22 de Novembro de 20
h two inOnly routes instead of one InOut?
-Original Message-
From: Claus Ibsen [mailto:claus.ib...@gmail.com]
Sent: terça-feira, 22 de Novembro de 2011 15:12
To: users@camel.apache.org
Subject: Re: Queue/Dequeue perfomance InOut ExchangePattern
There is API on CamelContext to create a n
er. How do
> I initialize it?
>
> I also didn't understand what you ment whet saying I could use two inOnly
> routes instead of one InOut. Can you give me and examples?
>
> Best regards,
> Carlos Figueiredo
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Chri
d use two inOnly
routes instead of one InOut. Can you give me and examples?
Best regards,
Carlos Figueiredo
-Original Message-
From: Christian Müller [mailto:christian.muel...@gmail.com]
Sent: sexta-feira, 18 de Novembro de 2011 18:39
To: users@camel.apache.org
Subject: Re: Queue/Dequeue
If you use an embedded broker, you should consider using the VM
(vm://brokerName) protocol instead of TCP (tcp://localhost:61616). But this
has nothing to do with your issue... ;-)
If you have to achieve high throughput, you should consider using async
messaging (two inOnly routes instead of one I
I'm using Camel with Activemq to implement a simple queue where I can enqueue
some requests (a simple xml) to be consumed latter. To consume I use the InOut
ExchangePattern and PoolEnrich.
My issue is the lack of performance during the dequeue process. When I POST
some requests it has very ni
