Direct component provide direct invocation between a producer a consumer.
In the route that you present seems that there is a problem because
you can't have two endpoint with the same name.
after that the flow is the this:
1: read from file:///data/input/
2: from the step 1 to("file:///data/output") there is no action
than the message is the same that you read on the step 1
Cheers
--Filippo
2011/7/6 Marco Westermann <[email protected]>:
> Hi Filippo,
>
> thank you for your answer, but what is the orgininal input message when
> direct-routes come into play? If an error happens in one of the direct
> routes, is the original message then the one which comes as input into the
> direct-route or the one from the file-endpoint?
> And what is the original input message if we would exchange one of the
> direct with a jms endpoint?
>
>
> regards Marco
>
> Am 06.07.2011 10:08, schrieb Filippo Balicchia:
>>
>> DeadLetter channel use the orginal input message and move it on dead
>> letter channel queue.
>>
>> --Filippo
>>
>>
>>
>> 2011/7/6 Marco Westermann<[email protected]>:
>>>
>>> Hi, just a little understanding question. If I have a route
>>>
>>> from("file:///data/input/)
>>> .to("direct:transform")
>>> .to("direct:enrich")
>>> .to("direct:transform)
>>> .to("file:///data/output")
>>>
>>> what message would
>>> deadLetterChannel("direct:failedFiles").useOriginalMessage() handle, when
>>> an
>>> error occur within one of the direct endpoints and how would the scope of
>>> the error handler affect that behaviour?
>>>
>>> Thank you Marco
>>>
>
>
