Thanks for your help. I was thinking that the interceptors might be a good idea. I like the idea of the responsibility being in the broker because, you could argue, it is the broker and not the client that should concern itself with HA and load balancing etc.
The Transformer on the Producer sounds quite clean but it still assumes the client takes responsibilty. I really like the idea of Camel. I was reading about the EIP's the other day. I'm afraid I probably haven't understood its purpose properly. I thought it was a framework of recommended patterns which Active actually implements. Are you saying that I can specifically get Active to use some of those patterns? Sorry - a bit thick here. Thanks again. James.Strachan wrote: > > On 5/7/07, Banana Man <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> Is it possible to configure the broker to dynamically attach a message >> group >> to an incoming message based on the content of that message (e.g. an >> xpath >> or selector)? > > Interesting idea :) > > You could use a Broker Interceptor to do such a thing... > http://activemq.apache.org/interceptors.html > > though that is a bit of a performance overhead; the broker often > doesn't have to de-marshal the message payload; forcing the de-marshal > will definitely slow the broker down & burn more CPU. A better > approach would be to add this as a transformer on the producer.... > http://activemq.apache.org/message-transformation.html > > Or yet another option is to use Camel to consume from one queue, > transforming the message to add the message group, then publish to > another destination... > http://activemq.apache.org/camel/enterprise-integration-patterns.html > -- > James > ------- > http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Message-Groups-tf3706231s2354.html#a10367090 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
