In RoutingSlipCreator maybe add a slip like
"jms:foo?exchangePattern=InOut,jms:bar?exchangePattern=InOut" instead of
just the plain endpoint URIs.
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Scott Parkerson
<scott.parker...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Camel riders,
>
> I've got a route that makes use of the Routing Slip EIP. Right now, a
> processor is used to create the header to be used with the routingSlip
> processor. Once that is done, the routingSlip then passes the messages
> on to one or more ActiveMQ queues as targets.
>
> It was my understanding that the Routing Slip EIP is supposed to take
> a message and send it to each destination synchronously (i.e. go to
> destination "A", then destination "B", and so on until all of the
> destinations in the routing slip header are visited, or an exception
> occurs). However, during my experimentation, I've seen that the
> routing slip processor seems to happily "fulfill" its duties by
> sending to all of the destinations near simultaneously if the
> destinations are ActiveMQ queues.
>
> Here's my RouteBuilder:
>
> /*..*/
> getContext().addInterceptStrategy(new Tracer());
>
> from("activemq:results")
> .unmarshal(bufFormatter)
> .bean(RoutingSlipCreator.class) /* adds "activemq:foo,
> etc. as needed"
> .routingSlip("routingSlip");
>
> from("activemq:foo")
> .bean(Foo.class);
>
> from("activemq:bar")
> .bean(Bar.class);
>
> from("activemq:baz")
> .bean(Baz.class);
>
> from("activemq:quux")
> .bean(Quux.class);
>
> And here's an example of the tracer tracing this interaction (I've
> deleted the contents of the body for brevity):
>
> DefaultMessageListenerContainer-1 INFO
> [org.apache.camel.processor.interceptor.Tracer] -
> ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:5:1:1:1 >>> (route1) -->
>
> com.ateb.dataproc.obc_processor.processor.postcontact.routingslipcrea...@407e75d2
> <<< Pattern:InOnly, Headers:{JMSPriority=4, JMSDeliveryMode=2,
> JMSMessageID=ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:5:1:1:1,
> JMSCorrelationID=null, JMSRedelivered=false,
> JMSTimestamp=1273613390576, JMSType=null, JMSReplyTo=null,
> underTest=true, JMSDestination=queue://results, JMSXGroupID=null,
> JMSExpiration=0}, BodyType:java.util.HashMap, Body:{ ... }
>
> DefaultMessageListenerContainer-1 INFO
> [org.apache.camel.processor.interceptor.Tracer] -
> ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:5:1:1:1 >>> (route1)
>
> com.ateb.dataproc.obc_processor.processor.postcontact.routingslipcrea...@407e75d2
> --> routingSlip[routingSlip] <<< Pattern:InOnly,
> Headers:{JMSDeliveryMode=2,
> routingSlip=activemq:foo,activemq:bar,activemq:baz,activemq:quux,
> JMSMessageID=ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:5:1:1:1,
> JMSDestination=queue://results, JMSRedelivered=false, underTest=true,
> JMSPriority=4, JMSTimestamp=1273613390576, JMSCorrelationID=null,
> JMSType=null, JMSReplyTo=null, JMSXGroupID=null, JMSExpiration=0},
> BodyType:java.util.HashMap, Body:{ ... }
>
> DefaultMessageListenerContainer-1 INFO
> [org.apache.camel.processor.interceptor.Tracer] -
> ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:2:1 >>> (route3)
> from(activemq://bar) -->
> com.ateb.dataproc.obc_processor.processor.postcontact....@1ee2433b <<<
> Pattern:InOnly, Headers:{JMSCorrelationID=null,
> CamelJmsDeliveryMode=2, underTest=true, JMSType=null,
> JMSXGroupID=null, JMSTimestamp=1273613391428, JMSExpiration=0,
> JMSDestination=queue://bar, JMSReplyTo=null, JMSRedelivered=false,
> JMSMessageID=ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:2:1,
> JMSPriority=4, JMSDeliveryMode=2,
> routingSlip=activemq:baz,activemq:quux}, BodyType:java.util.HashMap,
> Body:{ ... }
>
> DefaultMessageListenerContainer-1 INFO
> [org.apache.camel.processor.interceptor.Tracer] -
> ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:3:1 >>> (route4)
> from(activemq://baz) -->
> com.ateb.dataproc.obc_processor.processor.postcontact....@5809fdee <<<
> Pattern:InOnly, Headers:{JMSTimestamp=1273613391434, JMSXGroupID=null,
> CamelJmsDeliveryMode=2,
> JMSMessageID=ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:3:1,
> JMSPriority=4, routingSlip=activemq:quux, JMSDeliveryMode=2,
> JMSExpiration=0, JMSReplyTo=null, JMSType=null, JMSRedelivered=false,
> JMSDestination=queue://baz, JMSCorrelationID=null, underTest=true},
> BodyType:java.util.HashMap, Body:{ ... }
>
> DefaultMessageListenerContainer-1 INFO
> [org.apache.camel.processor.interceptor.Tracer] -
> ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:1:1 >>> (route2)
> from(activemq://foo) -->
> com.ateb.dataproc.obc_processor.processor.postcontact....@43ce663c <<<
> Pattern:InOnly, Headers:{JMSXGroupID=null, JMSPriority=4,
> JMSDeliveryMode=2, CamelJmsDeliveryMode=2, JMSTimestamp=1273613391410,
> JMSExpiration=0, JMSType=null, JMSCorrelationID=null, underTest=true,
> JMSReplyTo=null, JMSDestination=queue://foo,
> routingSlip=activemq:bar,activemq:baz,activemq:quux,
> JMSRedelivered=false,
> JMSMessageID=ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:1:1},
> BodyType:java.util.HashMap, Body:{...}
>
> DefaultMessageListenerContainer-1 INFO
> [org.apache.camel.processor.interceptor.Tracer] -
> ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:4:1 >>> (route5)
> from(activemq://quux) -->
> com.ateb.dataproc.obc_processor.processor.postcontact.q...@34cef6f1
> <<< Pattern:InOnly, Headers:{underTest=true,
> JMSMessageID=ID:xyzzy.ateb.com-52179-1273613387168-2:7:1:4:1,
> CamelJmsDeliveryMode=2, routingSlip=, JMSTimestamp=1273613391450,
> JMSDeliveryMode=2, JMSXGroupID=null, JMSExpiration=0,
> JMSDestination=queue://quux, JMSRedelivered=false, JMSPriority=4,
> JMSReplyTo=null, JMSType=null, JMSCorrelationID=null},
> BodyType:java.util.HashMap, Body:{ ...}
>
> So, what am I to do here? The reason I have these broken out into
> separate queues is to be able to break up the transactions; some of
> the processors require outside resources (Webservices, for example)
> which may be down or problematic. I'd like to be able to deal with
> that gracefully should any one of the processes fail without having to
> repeat the pieces of the routing slip that have been successfully
> dealt with.
>
> But more troubling to me is that the DSL makes it extremely easy to
> write an "implementation" of the Routing Slip EIP which doesn't work
> like a routing slip at all.
>
> Is there any way to fix my route so it works? Do I have to make all of
> my exchanges InOut, perhaps? Help!
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
--
Cheers,
Jon
Camel in Action: http://manning.com/ibsen
Blog: http://janstey.blogspot.com
