Quantcast

How temporary are the temporary queues in Camel Request/Reply pattern?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
emb
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate
star

How temporary are the temporary queues in Camel Request/Reply pattern?

emb
Do Temporary Queues get deleted at all? Or are the destinations valid
while the route is running?

Suppose we have a simple route like so;
<route>
  <from uri="timer:foo?period=5000"/>
  <inOut uri="activemq:queue:Test.Queue"/>
</route>

Suppose also, that the activemq endopoint times out. In other words,
the replier took longer than the timeout to reply.

Would you expect the replier to successfully place a message in the
temporary queue?

We found that the temporary destination stay alive and ignores
incoming messages with incorrect correlation ids. This may be a
desirable behaviour, however if the messages are critical dropping
them or ignoring them is perhaps not the best option. Our replier was
designed to fall back on a different queue if the temporary
destination was deleted.

What do my fellow camel users do in this scenario?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate
star

Re: How temporary are the temporary queues in Camel Request/Reply pattern?

Claus Ibsen-2
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:59 AM, ED M Barwani <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Do Temporary Queues get deleted at all? Or are the destinations valid
> while the route is running?
>
> Suppose we have a simple route like so;
> <route>
>  <from uri="timer:foo?period=5000"/>
>  <inOut uri="activemq:queue:Test.Queue"/>
> </route>
>
> Suppose also, that the activemq endopoint times out. In other words,
> the replier took longer than the timeout to reply.
>

The JMS API to create a temporary queue is being used.
And to my understanding the temp queue is valid as long the JMSSession is.


> Would you expect the replier to successfully place a message in the
> temporary queue?
>
> We found that the temporary destination stay alive and ignores
> incoming messages with incorrect correlation ids. This may be a
> desirable behaviour, however if the messages are critical dropping
> them or ignoring them is perhaps not the best option. Our replier was
> designed to fall back on a different queue if the temporary
> destination was deleted.
>
> What do my fellow camel users do in this scenario?



--
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
FuseSource
Email: [hidden email]
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Blog: http://davsclaus.com
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
Loading...