Hi Ilya,
That's an interesting routing example. I have a couple of observations about
your routes, based on my understanding of Camel transactions (which is by no
means perfect!).
Route 1:
from("jms:queue:numbers")
.policy(pp)
.to("jms:queue:mybadqueue?transactedInOut=tr
quot;multiplier");
>
> I was hoping this exception will be propagated up to my producer.
> However, by default, with deadLetterQueue, the exception does not seem
> to be propageted.
> I thought this could be done with transactional error handler, and
> that's why I&
The first argument to pollEnrich() specifies a consumer endpoint, not a
producer endpoint. So, instead of sending the current exchange (the one
containing the header) to the endpoint, the pollEnrich() command creates a
new exchange object containing one of the files from the specified
directory, /
Also, Progress Software provides free (beta) documentation on its fusesource
open source Web site: http://fuseeip.fusesource.org/documentation/index.html
and at http://fusesource.com/products/enterprise-camel/
These docs are currently at version 1.6, but they will be updated to 2.0 in
a few weeks
Hi Johnathan,
To elaborate on Claus's reply. In general, you cannot really process InOut
exchanges inside a transaction (yes, there is a 'transactedInOut' option,
but it only applies to a very special use case and is not relevant to your
example).
The best approach, as Claus suggested, is to spl
I noticed that in the latest source code, the implementation of the
transform() processor does not propagate any attachments. Is there a reason
for that? Could it be a bug?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Why-does-the-transform%28%29-processor-not-propagate-attachments--tp
