I just added every bit of exception handling that I could think of to
the example: http://pastebin.com/s9nHMihT

None of these are triggered by this exception (no additional logging
as specified), the program terminates with exact the same output. What
am I doing wrong?


Thanks,
Sander

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Sander Mak <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks,
>
> I must add that on the application that I encountered this on I do
> have an errorHandler defined. Will have to play a bit with it to find
> out why the exception is not caught then. Since the exception is
> logged at debug level I was under the impression that it is already
> handled by AMQ or Camel.
>
> Sander
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Ashwin Karpe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It is quite straightforward. When the ActiveMQ broker is down a connection
>> cannot be created to the broker. If one already exists, the connection
>> becomes stale and unusable due to non-availability of the broker. This would
>> cause in your case an exception to be thrown. Since the exception is not
>> trapped in any way, the code is not running in a container but on the Java
>> mainline, the JVM is destroyed following the stack trace.
>>
>> If on the other hand, you add an exception handler to the camel route, you
>> will find that the exception can be caught and handled without destroying
>> the JVM.
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Ashwin...
>>
>> -----
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> Ashwin Karpe
>> Apache Camel Committer & Sr Principal Consultant
>> FUSESource (a Progress Software Corporation subsidiary)
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>> Blog: http://opensourceknowledge.blogspot.com
>> CamelOne 2011: http://fusesource.com/camel2011
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> View this message in context: 
>> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Broker-shutdown-also-shuts-Camel-application-down-tp4549804p4551079.html
>> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>

Reply via email to