On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 8:37 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: >> >> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: >>>> >>>> generally: we've talked before and the whole design around that area >>>> of the system could be so much better >>>> >>>> technology: actually support for any distributable messaging solution >>>> but i can see no reason not to use a standard >>> >>> I agree. >>> >>> FYI I had an interesting discussion with James Strachan few weeks ago, >>> here: >>> http://markmail.org/message/mp2pafe77efwczbb >> >> it's always interesting talking to james :-) >> >> he's definitely thinking in the same directions as me >> >> - robert > > I had no time yet to check CAMEL, and there are few issues we already found > discussing the JMS solution (no way to avoid writing the full message over > and over again when moving from one queue to another is my main concern), > but I bookmarked the thread and camel for my next "meditation" weekend > (unfortunately not so frequent lately).
MOM works surprisingly well provided that the message sizes are small. IMHO JAMES should not be attempting to load large bodies into memory. instead, a limited buffer should be used initially: big enough to hold the headers (and small messages). once this is filled, the message should be streamed directly to storage. the message would contain the headers plus a reference URL for the body. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
