Thank you for your answer George.
We are using the XML DSL. When we try something like this:
<route id="route 1">
<from uri="jms:queue:queuein/>
<transacted ref="PROPAGATION_REQUIRES_NEW"/>
<process ref="process1/>
<to uri="direct:nextRoute1/>
</route>
<route id="route 2>
<from uri="direct:nextRoute1"/>
<transacted ref="PROPAGATION_REQUIRED"/>
<process ref="process2"/>
<to uri="direct:nextRoute2"/>
</route>
<route id="route 3">
<from uri="direct:nextRoute2"/>
<transacted ref="PROPAGATION_REQUIRED"/>
<process ref="process3">
<to ref="jms:queue:queueout/>
</route>
If process2 throws an exception, we see that the transaction is rolled back
with redelivered = false and the message has disappeared. However, if process1
throws an exception, the transaction is rolled back with redelivered = true and
the message is back on the incoming queue.
This is what I meant by a transaction spanning routes. It seems like this
approach should work, but we must be using it wrong.
-----Original Message-----
From: George Daswani <georgedasw...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2021 4:20 PM
To: users@camel.apache.org
Subject: [External] Re: Looking for a transactional solution
WARNING: This message was received from an EXTERNAL EMAIL ADDRESS.
Examine the URL and use caution BEFORE clicking links or opening any
attachments.
Steve,
The transactional EIP supports crossing multiple routes as long as
each one of those routes are transactionally aware (transaction
demarcation) and your JMS connection factory is configured properly and
set-up to use a transaction manager. I personally use camel under an OSGI
container (karaf & blueprint)) and transaction demarcation stuff works just
fine with the transaction manager that is feature installable with KARAF
(JTA). If you are using something like spring boot, plenty of JTA
transaction managers available (atomikos, bitronix). The JTA transaction
manager will allow you to read from one type of message broker (e.q.
ActiveMQ) and write to another type of message broker (e.q. IBM MQ) in one
transaction boundary.
https://clicktime.symantec.com/3NL8rtk3CaQa9bJreF5FDn7Vc?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcamel.apache.org%2Fcomponents%2F3.4.x%2Feips%2Ftransactional-client.html
For example.
<bean id="PROPAGATION_REQUIRED"
class="org.apache.camel.spring.spi.SpringTransactionPolicy">
<property name="transactionManager" ref="jmsTransactionManager"/></bean>
<bean id="PROPAGATION_REQUIRES_NEW"
class="org.apache.camel.spring.spi.SpringTransactionPolicy">
<property name="transactionManager" ref="jmsTransactionManager"/>
<property name="propagationBehaviorName"
value="PROPAGATION_REQUIRES_NEW"/></bean>
from("readFromQueue").transacted("PROPAGATION_REQUIRES_NEW").to("direct:doSomeProcessing").to("writeToQ");
from("doSomeProcessing").transacted("PROPAGATION_REQUIRED");
from("writeToQ").transacted(PROPAGATION_REQUIRED");
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 12:28 PM Brenneis, Steve <
steve.brenn...@theclearinghouse.org> wrote:
> I hope this is the right place to ask this question. If not, maybe
> someone can direct me to the right place.
>
> I have an application that reads messages from a queue, passes them
> off to a content-based router, which then passes them to various
> validation and transformation routes. At the end of each series of
> routes the transformed, validated messages are placed onto another queue.
>
> The problem to be solved is that the messages must be delivered once
> and only once to the outgoing queue. The solution to this would seem
> to be a queue-to-queue XA transaction, but I can't find anything that
> indicates that a transaction could cross route boundaries.
>
> Is there such a solution available? Thanks for any help with this.
>
> Steve Brenneis
>
> This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or
> confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the
> e-mail and notify us immediately.
>
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and notify us
immediately.
