Thanks for the response Gert. I've moved to using the HTTP client with a rule for routing.
The only way I could think of to make this happen in the remote client is to continue checking for the desired endpoint until the given timeout is met on the sendsync call. If the timeout is met and the endpoint has still not been found then the "Could not find route.." error message could be thrown. This would be rather than the current method of throwing the "Could not find route.." error immediately from sendsync when the remote client does not know about the endpoint. Although, with this it may be harder to distinguish between a network/communication error and a missing endpoint. Chris Gert Vanthienen wrote: > > Chris, > > You're probably right about the RemoteServiceMixClient not yet having > received all the information from the other container. Not sure if > there's a way we can solve this generically -- I don't see a real way > to know which endpoints we should have received. We might be able to > improve the RemoteServiceMixClient's send methods to retry the > MessageExchange if it fails for this reason (an endpoint not being > registered) on the first attempt. Feel free to raise a JIRA issue to > have this investigated... > > Another option, but I don't know if it would work in your use case, > would be to avoid the use of the RemoteServiceMixClient alltogether > and connect to ActiveMQ that's embedded in ServiceMix. > > Regards, > > Gert Vanthienen > ------------------------ > Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RemoteServiceMixClient-jms-endpoint-synchronization-problem-tp22169440p22223181.html Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
