Am 14.08.12 19:45 schrieb "Raul Kripalani" unter <r...@fusesource.com>:
>Yes, it is working as expected. > >If you don't set a custom Aggregation Strategy on the Splitter, as of >Camel >2.3, it will return the original body by default. Thanks for the clarification, which I missed by the Splitter documentation of Wiki. Babak > >Regards, > >*Raúl Kripalani* >*Principal Consultant | FuseSource Corp. >r...@fusesource.com | fusesource.com <http://www.fusesource.com/> >skype: raul.fuse | twitter: @raulvk <http://twitter.com/raulvk>, >@fusenews<http://twitter.com/fusenews> >* >blog: F3 - Flashes From the >Field<http://blog.raulkr.net/?utm_source=fusesourceemail&utm_medium=email&; >utm_campaign=fusesourcemail> > | aboutme: http://about.me/raulkripalani > ><http://twitter.com/fusenews> > >On 14 August 2012 16:16, Babak Vahdat <babak.vah...@swissonline.ch> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I'm still a bit confused regarding a question by another thread and >>would >> like to ask you about the point I'm missing here. >> >> The following test passes (e.g. using the trunk code or 2.10.0 release) >> which I can follow and understand: >> >> public class TwoRoutesTest extends CamelTestSupport { >> >> @Test >> public void test1() throws Exception { >> getMockEndpoint("mock:result").expectedBodiesReceived("another >> body"); >> getMockEndpoint("mock:result2").expectedBodiesReceived("another >> body"); >> >> template.sendBody("direct:start", "body"); >> >> assertMockEndpointsSatisfied(); >> } >> >> @Override >> protected RouteBuilder createRouteBuilder() throws Exception { >> return new RouteBuilder() { >> @Override >> public void configure() throws Exception { >> >> from("direct:start").to("direct:process").to("mock:result"); >> >> from("direct:process").process(new Processor() { >> @Override >> public void process(Exchange exchange) throws >>Exception >> { >> Object body = exchange.getIn().getBody(); >> exchange.getIn().setBody("another " + body); >> } >> }).to("mock:result2"); >> } >> }; >> } >> } >> >> Now consider the following test which is similar to the previous one but >> this one would fail: >> >> public class TwoRoutes2Test extends CamelTestSupport { >> >> @Test >> public void test2() throws Exception { >> getMockEndpoint("mock:result").expectedBodiesReceived("a", "b", >> "c"); // changing to "a,b,c" will make the test to pass >> getMockEndpoint("mock:result2").expectedBodiesReceived("a", "b", >> "c"); >> >> template.sendBody("direct:start", "a,b,c"); >> >> assertMockEndpointsSatisfied(); >> } >> >> @Override >> protected RouteBuilder createRouteBuilder() throws Exception { >> return new RouteBuilder() { >> @Override >> public void configure() throws Exception { >> >> from("direct:start").to("direct:process").to("mock:result"); >> >> from("direct:process").split(body()).to("mock:result2"); >> } >> }; >> } >> } >> >> That's in contrast to the first test by the second test the outcome of >>the >> second route (InOut) is not taken into the account by the direct >>producer >> (...to("direct:producer")...) which to my understanding should have been >> set >> as the body of the Out Message of the current Exchange by the first >>route, >> that's in consistence with the first test. >> >> Is this behaviour "worked as designed"? To me this's a bug or let's say >> it's >> a "not consistent". Does this behaviour have anything to do with the UoW >> stuff. >> >> Thanks in advance for any advice >> Babak >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> >>http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Is-this-routing-behaviour-as-expected-t >>p5717331.html >> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>
