Last time I checked (maybe 10 month ago), Camel was using the old async producer, which is not reliable (no callbacks!). Make sure they improved this before using it in a system where reliability is important.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Asaf Mesika <asaf.mes...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'd stay off the Camel. It's performance is quite low. Up to 5-10 mb/sec > it׳s ok but above that it will be your bottleneck. > The problem with Camel is that sometime it's Endpoints have special > behavior which is hard to understand and debugging it is a mess. We are now > migrating away from it. > > On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 at 05:26 Christian Posta <christian.po...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hate to bring up "non-flashy" technology... but Apache Camel would be a >> great fit for something like this. Two java libraries each with very strong >> suits. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Avi Flax <avi.f...@parkassist.com> wrote: >> >> > On 6/2/16, 07:03, "Eno Thereska" <eno.there...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > Using the low-level streams API you can definitely read or write to >> > arbitrary >> > > locations inside the process() method. >> > >> > Ah, good to know — thank you! >> > >> > > However, back to your original question: even with the low-level >> streams >> > > API the sources and sinks can only be Kafka topics for now. So, as Gwen >> > > mentioned, Connect would be the way to go to bring the data to a Kafka >> > > Topic first. >> > >> > Got it — thank you! >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> *Christian Posta* >> twitter: @christianposta >> http://www.christianposta.com/blog >> http://fabric8.io >>
