Hi Willem,
We do not want to use a temporary queue for replies, because it is
scoped to the lifetime of the connection, and any data sent to that
queue will be lost if the connection gets lost for some reason.
We can't set the replyTo queue at route definition time because the
reply queue name is not known until after communication is established.
In fact, in our application we are only using a single JMS queue for all
replies, which will be used for the duration of the application, so (for
us) there is no memory/thread resource leak issue. I can understand how
this feature, if used/abused by others, may cause a resource problem.
1. Is there some reason Camel must use a separate thread per reply
queue, instead of using the JMS dispatch thread or a shared Camel
dispatch thread?
2. Otherwise, could this "leak" be documented as a limitation?
I think this feature can be useful, if it can be supported, since it
provides more implementation flexibility/dynamism. However if it cannot
be supported, I think I should be able to work around it.
Thanks,
Jim
On 5/26/2011 3:29 PM, Willem Jiang wrote:
Hi Jim,
Claus give some inputs on the CAMEL-4008, one of his concern is
letting the user setting the ReplyTo property will cause some memory
leak, as camel-jms will start a jms listener per reply queue and only
release it when the camel context is shut down,
I don't know why you want to set the ReplyTo property at the run time,
it will not affect the JMS consumer as the ReplyTo will be set with a
tempera queue name by default. And You can also set the ReplyTo to
persistent queue through the JMS URI option, if you want to use
persistent queue to store the reply message.
So I'm afraid I had to revert the change shortly.
Any thought ?
On 5/24/11 5:13 PM, Willem Jiang wrote:
Hi,
I created a JIRA[1] for this issue, and also committed quick fix for it.
It should be part of Camel 2.8.0, and you can using header name
"camelJmsReplyTo" to set the jms replyTo property.
[1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-4008
On 5/24/11 12:47 PM, Willem Jiang wrote:
I can reproduce the error and will dig the code for it.
On 5/24/11 11:29 AM, Jim Newsham wrote:
I have tried "queue:myqueue" and the result is the same. I tried both:
//exchange.getIn().setHeader("JMSReplyTo",
ActiveMQConverter.toDestination("queue:myqueue"));
exchange.getIn().setHeader("JMSReplyTo", "queue:myqueue");
Thanks,
Jim
On 5/23/2011 5:21 PM, Willem Jiang wrote:
Hi,
Can you change the queue name to queue:myqueue?
On 5/24/11 11:13 AM, Jim Newsham wrote:
Hi Willem,
Unfortunately I do not know the reply-to queue name at the time the
route is created, which is why I hoped to set the reply-to header
dynamically. Are you saying that my example should work if I used a
javax.jms.Destination? I have tried the following but the result is
the
same as before.
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
exchange.getIn().setHeader("JMSReplyTo",
ActiveMQConverter.toDestination("queue://myqueue"));
}
Thanks,
Jim
