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 split your route into two
parts: one route to handle the 'request' leg of the processing and another
route to handle the 'reply' leg of the processing. You need to break up the
request/reply queue, 'queue:persistancequeue', into two separate queues that
explicitly handle the request and reply legs, e.g. 'queue:requestqueue' and
'queue:replyqueue'.
You can then write your route in the form of two separate transactional
routes:
from("queue:incomingqueue?transacted=true")
.process(getSomeTranslationProcessor())
.to("queue:requestqueue")
from("queue:replyqueue?transacted=true")
.process(getSomeOtherTransformerProcessor())
.to("queue:outgoingqueue");
The exchanges passing through these routes should be of InOnly type. I added
the ?transacted=true option just to indicate that both routes are
transactional. Of course, you have to do all the additional Spring
configuration to make the 'queue' component transactional as well.
Regards,
Fintan
Claus Ibsen-2 wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Try using a 2nd JMS component for sending. Then its separated from the
> 1st component.
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 12:26 AM, jonathanq <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I am having an issue with JMS queues and transactions.
>>
>> I have the following route:
>>
>> from("queue:incomingqueue")
>> .process(getSomeTranslationProcessor())
>> .process(getMyPersistanceProcessor())
>> .process(getSomeOtherTransformerProcessor())
>> .to("queue:outgoingqueue");
>>
>> The first and third processor just do some simple transformation on the
>> exchange. The middle processor (myPersistanceProcessor) is the key
>> piece.
>>
>> It is a processor that sends part of the exchange to another queue and
>> requests a reply back. It uses a ProducerTemplate and looks like:
>>
>> Long recordDBId = (Long)producer.sendBody("queue:persistancequeue",
>> ExchangePattern.InOut, objectToPersist);
>>
>> It is a synchronous process - so the myPersistanceProcessor will wait for
>> a
>> reply back before continuing.
>>
>> Now - the issue I have is this. If that InOut part of the route fails
>> for
>> any reason (such as a time out, returns an error etc). I want to
>> essentially NOT acknowledge the message from the original incoming JMS
>> queue
>> (meaning it will go back on the front of the queue).
>>
>>
>> I know that if you just do a "queue:incomingqueue?transacted=true" - it
>> will
>> put the message back on the queue if the exchange failed. However If you
>> add "transacted=true" to the incoming queue in my route - it will never
>> send
>> the message for the RequestReply part.
>>
>> Based on the documentation - that is because we must first commit the
>> transaction and then start another. However there is mention of the
>> value
>> "transactedInOut=true" which seems to imply it will create a transaction
>> that wraps the WHOLE process (including the requestreply).
>>
>> In practice - using "transactedInOut=true" means that if the
>> producer.sendBody() timesout, it sends an eviction notice for that
>> message -
>> but the original exchange does NOT get put back on the incoming queue.
>> In
>> fact it disappears altogether. The Camel JMX bean does not record it as
>> a
>> "Failed Exchange" - even through the log message says it was a failed
>> exchange. The exposed Camel JMX thinks it was a successful exchange.
>>
>> Is that how the "transactedInOut=true" is supposed to operate? Is there
>> any
>> way to tell the incoming queue that we did NOT process the message and
>> have
>> it put back there if it failed? Is there an error route that would put
>> the
>> original message back on the queue? Or is that where using the:
>>
>> onException(Exception.class)
>> .maximumRedeliveries(-1)
>>
>> comes into play - as that will cause it to just be re-tried constantly?
>>
>> Thanks for any help you can offer!
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://old.nabble.com/JMS-Transactions-and-RequestReply---transactedInOut%3Dtrue-not-working--tp26138285p26138285.html
>> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Claus Ibsen
> Apache Camel Committer
>
> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
> Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/JMS-Transactions-and-RequestReply---transactedInOut%3Dtrue-not-working--tp26138285p26198336.html
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
