Enforcing order in synch programming is not an easy order. Why do they have to be consumed in a particular order? There are ways to handle such things but they won't be simple. Different queues behave at different speeds potentially. I think I would need more information to suggest a strategy. For example, if it was different parts of an order I could build a route that aggregates messages using the order id and builds super messages with all of the information. This is sort of like the scatter-gather pattern without the scatter. Another example is if it was orders that had to be processed in a first come first serve manner, I could look at the time and date of the order and process them. Try to keep sequential logic out of things and enforce any order in other manners.
*Robert Simmons Jr. MSc. - Lead Java Architect @ EA* *Author of: Maintainable Java (Kindle <http://www.amazon.com/Maintainable-Java-Robert-Simmons-Jr-ebook/dp/B00AKHI69K>)(iTunes <https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/maintainable-java/id585666097?mt=11>)* *LinkedIn: **http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-simmons/40/852/a39 <http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-simmons/40/852/a39>* On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Darwish <othman.darw...@progressoft.com> wrote: > Hi , > > I have a requirement where the processing of messages in FIFO produced > from multiple AMQ queues is critical , optionally those messages may be > forward to a single dedicated queue "X" after some business rules > evaluation . > > My concern is :if I build multiple routes to consumes messages from > multiple AMQ queues and conditionally push those message to "X" queue for > further processing .Is the FIFO/FIFS guaranteed when I consuming the “X” > queue ? > > Please advice > > > > > > ----- > Othman Darwish > ProgressSoft Corp. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Consuming-messages-from-multiple-AMQ-queues-and-forward-it-to-single-AMQ-queue-concern-tp5752514.html > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
