Hi I created a new ticket to track changing this behavior https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1744
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote: > The original ticket for this is: CAMEL-501 > https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-501 > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi >> Yeah I think the idea was that it should remember if an exception occurred >> once during a poll. >> And then report it when it was stopping. >> >> But I think it should ignore this and just do as it does log a WARN when >> the poll failed. >> >> So we can do a clean stop. And the logic that stops should try to stop all >> resources and not break at first exception. >> >> There is a ticket somewhere in JIRA to allow some sort of strategy what to >> do when an exception occurred in the poller logic. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Siegfried.Wirth < >> siegfried.wi...@capgemini-sdm.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> when testing some ftp functionality I found the following issue which may >>> indicate a bug in ScheduledPollingConsumer: >>> >>> 1) I start a route using FtpConsumer (and thus a >>> ScheduledPollingConsumer) >>> 2) This route encounters an error, because the ftp server is not >>> available >>> and thus an excpetion is logged. >>> 3) Now I try to stop the route (to do some reconfigurations and later i >>> want >>> to start it again) and everything fails... >>> >>> I think there is the following problem in ScheduledPollingConsumer: >>> - When the run-Methods tries to poll and poll throws an exception, the >>> consumer 'remembers' this exception as firstExceptionThrown (there is a >>> variable named so in the polling consumer). >>> - When later on the route is stopped and therefore the >>> ScheduledPollingConsumer is stop the method doStop() is invoked. There is >>> the following code: >>> >>> doStop() { >>> [//call the real implementors to stop] >>> ... >>> if (firstExceptionThrown != null) { >>> throw firstExceptionThrown; >>> } >>> ... >>> } >>> >>> So this will throw an exception even if stopping the route works fine. >>> Therefore an exception is thrown in the context of stopping the route >>> that >>> occured in quite normal situation - but because it is thrown there, it is >>> really thrown and leads to failures. >>> >>> I think every method needs its own variable firstExceptionThrown, to >>> avoid >>> such cross-throwing-exception. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Siegfried Wirth >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://www.nabble.com/Bug-in-ScheduledPollingConsumer--tp24151070p24151070.html >>> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Claus Ibsen >> Apache Camel Committer >> >> Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com >> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus >> >> > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > Apache Camel Committer > > Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com > Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ > Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus > > -- Claus Ibsen Apache Camel Committer Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
