[jira] Created: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Created: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Key: CAMEL-960
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
             Project: Apache Camel
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: camel-core
    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
            Assignee: Claus Ibsen
             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0


Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
- option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
- support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
- maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
- maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this

And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.

See nabble:
http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html

We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.

Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Assigned: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org

     [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Hadrian Zbarcea reassigned CAMEL-960:
-------------------------------------

    Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea  (was: Claus Ibsen)

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46246#action_46246 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

See this one as well:
http://www.nabble.com/Exception-Handling-td19863662s22882.html

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46271#action_46271 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

Hadrian did you start on this one? Its very important for 1.5? Otherwise I have time this weekend.

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46300#action_46300 ]

Hadrian Zbarcea commented on CAMEL-960:
---------------------------------------

I think I can get this fixed pretty quickly, but I am not sure I understand the issue well.  There is fairly good set of tests in ExceptionBuilderTest.java.  From what I understand your point is that if one specifies something like:

{code}
onException(IOException.class)..maximumRedeliveries(0).to("mock:handled");
from("direct:a").to("mock:result");
{code}

then the following code (which works today) is *wrong*:

{code}
try {
  template.sendBody("direct:a", "Hello world");
  fail("Should have thrown a MyBusinessException");
} catch (RuntimeCamelException e) {
  assertTrue(e.getCause() instanceof MyBusinessException);
  // expected
}
{code}

and RuntimeCamelException should *not* be thrown because the exception was actually handled in a satisfactory way.  The test should only have:
{code}
  MockEndpoint result = getMockEndpoint("mock:result");
  result.expectedMessageCount(0);
  MockEndpoint handled = getMockEndpoint("mock:handled");
  handled.expectedMessageCount(1);

  template.sendBody("direct:a", "Hello world");
  // no exception, mock:result does not get a message, mock: handled gets one, no redelivery attempts
  result.assertIsSatisfied();
  handled.assertIsSatisfied();
{code}

For other exceptions that are not specified in an onException statement, or if onException only modifies the redelivery policy, the behavior should stay the same, and the RuntimeCamelException is to be expected.

Is my understanding correct?


> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46300#action_46300 ]

hadrian edited comment on CAMEL-960 at 10/9/08 9:25 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------

I think I can get this fixed pretty quickly, but I am not sure I understand the issue well.  There is fairly good set of tests in ExceptionBuilderTest.java.  From what I understand your point is that if one specifies something like:

{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).to("mock:handled");
from("direct:a").to("mock:result");
{code}

then the following code (which works today) is *wrong*:

{code}
try {
  template.sendBody("direct:a", "Hello world");
  fail("Should have thrown a MyBusinessException");
} catch (RuntimeCamelException e) {
  assertTrue(e.getCause() instanceof MyBusinessException);
  // expected
}
{code}

and RuntimeCamelException should *not* be thrown because the exception was actually handled in a satisfactory way.  The test should only have:
{code}
  MockEndpoint result = getMockEndpoint("mock:result");
  result.expectedMessageCount(0);
  MockEndpoint handled = getMockEndpoint("mock:handled");
  handled.expectedMessageCount(1);

  template.sendBody("direct:a", "Hello world");
  // no exception, mock:result does not get a message, mock: handled gets one, no redelivery attempts
  result.assertIsSatisfied();
  handled.assertIsSatisfied();
{code}

For other exceptions that are not specified in an onException statement, or if onException only modifies the redelivery policy, the behavior should stay the same, and the RuntimeCamelException is to be expected.

Is my understanding correct?


      was (Author: hadrian):
    I think I can get this fixed pretty quickly, but I am not sure I understand the issue well.  There is fairly good set of tests in ExceptionBuilderTest.java.  From what I understand your point is that if one specifies something like:

{code}
onException(IOException.class)..maximumRedeliveries(0).to("mock:handled");
from("direct:a").to("mock:result");
{code}

then the following code (which works today) is *wrong*:

{code}
try {
  template.sendBody("direct:a", "Hello world");
  fail("Should have thrown a MyBusinessException");
} catch (RuntimeCamelException e) {
  assertTrue(e.getCause() instanceof MyBusinessException);
  // expected
}
{code}

and RuntimeCamelException should *not* be thrown because the exception was actually handled in a satisfactory way.  The test should only have:
{code}
  MockEndpoint result = getMockEndpoint("mock:result");
  result.expectedMessageCount(0);
  MockEndpoint handled = getMockEndpoint("mock:handled");
  handled.expectedMessageCount(1);

  template.sendBody("direct:a", "Hello world");
  // no exception, mock:result does not get a message, mock: handled gets one, no redelivery attempts
  result.assertIsSatisfied();
  handled.assertIsSatisfied();
{code}

For other exceptions that are not specified in an onException statement, or if onException only modifies the redelivery policy, the behavior should stay the same, and the RuntimeCamelException is to be expected.

Is my understanding correct?

 

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46301#action_46301 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

Hadrian, yes the unit test is what we want, but I do think that this behavior should be configurable from
- a new fluent build syntax to indicate its handled.
- a special header on the message to indicate its handled (eg you can do some java coding in a processor and set that you handled it or not)
- onException should *not* handle it by default (but interesting thought)
- failureHandled fluent syntax also supports a predicate so you can use

So something like a *failureHandled* fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(true)
{code}

Also on the *onException* that I think is a cool feature
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(true).to("mock:handled");
[code}

And then if possible
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).process(myFailureHandlerCode);

public class MyFailureHandlerCode implements Processor {
...
   public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
    .. // do something
     // ah I can handle it so I set this special header
    exchange.getIn().setHeader("CamelFailureHandled", true);
}
}
{code}

{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(header("CanIDoIt"))

errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class))
{code}


> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46301#action_46301 ]

davsclaus edited comment on CAMEL-960 at 10/9/08 9:40 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------

Hadrian, yes the unit test is what we want, but I do think that this behavior should be configurable from
- a new fluent build syntax to indicate its handled.
- a special header on the message to indicate its handled (eg you can do some java coding in a processor and set that you handled it or not)
- onException should *not* handle it by default (but interesting thought)
- failureHandled fluent syntax also supports a predicate so you can use

So something like a *failureHandled* fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(true)
{code}

Also on the *onException* that I think is a cool feature
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(true).to("mock:handled");
{code}

And then if possible
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).process(myFailureHandlerCode);

public class MyFailureHandlerCode implements Processor {
...
   public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
    .. // do something
     // ah I can handle it so I set this special header
    exchange.getIn().setHeader("CamelFailureHandled", true);
}
}
{code}

And with the predicate for the fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(header("CanIDoIt"))

errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class))
{code}

Also supporting on the onException as well:
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class).to("mock:handled");
{code}


      was (Author: davsclaus):
    Hadrian, yes the unit test is what we want, but I do think that this behavior should be configurable from
- a new fluent build syntax to indicate its handled.
- a special header on the message to indicate its handled (eg you can do some java coding in a processor and set that you handled it or not)
- onException should *not* handle it by default (but interesting thought)
- failureHandled fluent syntax also supports a predicate so you can use

So something like a *failureHandled* fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(true)
{code}

Also on the *onException* that I think is a cool feature
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(true).to("mock:handled");
[code}

And then if possible
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).process(myFailureHandlerCode);

public class MyFailureHandlerCode implements Processor {
...
   public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
    .. // do something
     // ah I can handle it so I set this special header
    exchange.getIn().setHeader("CamelFailureHandled", true);
}
}
{code}

{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(header("CanIDoIt"))

errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class))
{code}

 

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46301#action_46301 ]

davsclaus edited comment on CAMEL-960 at 10/9/08 9:42 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------

Hadrian, yes the unit test is what we want, but I do think that this behavior should be configurable from
- a new fluent build syntax to indicate its handled.
- a special header on the message to indicate its handled (eg you can do some java coding in a processor and set that you handled it or not)
- onException should *not* handle it by default (but interesting thought)
- failureHandled fluent syntax also supports a predicate so you can use

So something like a *failureHandled* fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(true)
{code}

Also on the *onException* that I think is a cool feature
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(true).to("mock:handled");
{code}

And to let end users do some java coding of their own and set a special header to indicate handled or not
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).process(myFailureHandlerCode);

public class MyFailureHandlerCode implements Processor {
...
   public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
    .. // do something
     // ah I can handle it so I set this special header
    exchange.getIn().setHeader("CamelFailureHandled", true);
}
{code}

And with the predicate for the fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(header("CanIDoIt"))

errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class))
{code}

Also supporting on the onException as well:
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class).to("mock:handled");
{code}


BTW: The fix should be in restoreExceptionOnExchange in DeadLetterChannel.



      was (Author: davsclaus):
    Hadrian, yes the unit test is what we want, but I do think that this behavior should be configurable from
- a new fluent build syntax to indicate its handled.
- a special header on the message to indicate its handled (eg you can do some java coding in a processor and set that you handled it or not)
- onException should *not* handle it by default (but interesting thought)
- failureHandled fluent syntax also supports a predicate so you can use

So something like a *failureHandled* fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(true)
{code}

Also on the *onException* that I think is a cool feature
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(true).to("mock:handled");
{code}

And then if possible
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).process(myFailureHandlerCode);

public class MyFailureHandlerCode implements Processor {
...
   public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
    .. // do something
     // ah I can handle it so I set this special header
    exchange.getIn().setHeader("CamelFailureHandled", true);
}
}
{code}

And with the predicate for the fluent builder
{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(header("CanIDoIt"))

errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().maximumRedeliveries(3).failureHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class))
{code}

Also supporting on the onException as well:
{code}
onException(IOException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(bean(CanIHandleThis.class).to("mock:handled");
{code}

 

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46302#action_46302 ]

Hadrian Zbarcea commented on CAMEL-960:
---------------------------------------

@Claus, but that is already possible today (with the exception of the failureHandled() api).  What you added to my comment is that you want it explicit, not implicit.  Correct?  (I am on irc, btw)



> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46302#action_46302 ]

hadrian edited comment on CAMEL-960 at 10/9/08 9:47 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------

@Claus, but that is already possible today (with the exception of the failureHandled() api).  What you added to my comment is that you want it explicit, not implicit.  Correct?  (I am on irc, btw)

One more question.  If you want it explicit what should the default be?  If it's handled by onException() should we throw the RuntimeCamelException by default (if failureHandled(boolean) is not invoked) or consider it handled?

      was (Author: hadrian):
    @Claus, but that is already possible today (with the exception of the failureHandled() api).  What you added to my comment is that you want it explicit, not implicit.  Correct?  (I am on irc, btw)


 

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46302#action_46302 ]

hadrian edited comment on CAMEL-960 at 10/9/08 9:51 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------

@Claus, but that is already possible today (with the exception of the failureHandled() api).  What you added to my comment is that you want it explicit, not implicit.  Correct?  (I am on irc, btw)

One more question.  If you want it explicit what should the default be?  If it's handled by onException() should we throw the RuntimeCamelException by default (if failureHandled(boolean) is not invoked) or consider it handled?

RE: BTW: The fix should be in restoreExceptionOnExchange in DeadLetterChannel.
Right, but i thought about not invoking restore... at all if this code above was executed (i.e. processor is not null) and there is no other exception:
{code}
if (processor != null) {
  data.failureProcessor = processor;
}
{code}

      was (Author: hadrian):
    @Claus, but that is already possible today (with the exception of the failureHandled() api).  What you added to my comment is that you want it explicit, not implicit.  Correct?  (I am on irc, btw)

One more question.  If you want it explicit what should the default be?  If it's handled by onException() should we throw the RuntimeCamelException by default (if failureHandled(boolean) is not invoked) or consider it handled?
 

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46303#action_46303 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

What should the default be for failureHandled? Currently it is false all the time.

So the caller will know that the exchange failed and what the caused exception was. If we set failureHandled=true as default then the caller will newer know this and not get a correct response either.

What we want to support with this is that *you* can change this and say it is OK and also set another response if you like, something like this:
{code}
onException(NoOrderException.class).maximumRedeliveries(0).failreHandled(true).transform(constant("No Order");
{code}

And the caller would get the "No Order" text as a response instead of a NoOrderException.

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46304#action_46304 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

@Hadrian

No/yes its possible today, but we have a catch-22 situation where you have a route path using DLC and want it eg. to move a failued exchanges to a JMS queue.

{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().to("jms:failed");
from("jms:queue.a").to("bean:doSomething", "jms:queue.b");
{code}

If you use transacted JMS then you can not handle the exchange currently in Camel. If bean:doSomething throws an Exception it is caught by the DLC that will try to failure handle it and move it to *jms:failed*. This is possible, but then it *restoresTheOriginalException* and then transaction handler in Camel will rethrow this and then the TX is marked for rollback. And this you did not handle it, you could not mobe it to jms:failed and then its OK.

So what we want is to alter the restoreExceptionOnExchange  method in DeadLetterChannel, to NOT set the exception. But of course it should be configurable when to do this

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46304#action_46304 ]

davsclaus edited comment on CAMEL-960 at 10/9/08 9:57 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------

@Hadrian

No/yes its possible today, but we have a catch-22 situation where you have a route path using DLC and want it eg. to move a failued exchanges to a JMS queue.

{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().to("jms:failed");
from("jms:queue.a").to("bean:doSomething", "jms:queue.b");
{code}

If you use transacted JMS then you can not handle the exchange currently in Camel. If bean:doSomething throws an Exception it is caught by the DLC that will try to failure handle it and move it to *jms:failed*. This is possible, but then it *restoresTheOriginalException* and then transaction handler in Camel will rethrow this and then the TX is marked for rollback.

So what we want is to alter the restoreExceptionOnExchange  method in DeadLetterChannel, to NOT set the exception. But of course it should be configurable when to do this

      was (Author: davsclaus):
    @Hadrian

No/yes its possible today, but we have a catch-22 situation where you have a route path using DLC and want it eg. to move a failued exchanges to a JMS queue.

{code}
errorHandler(deadLetterChannel().to("jms:failed");
from("jms:queue.a").to("bean:doSomething", "jms:queue.b");
{code}

If you use transacted JMS then you can not handle the exchange currently in Camel. If bean:doSomething throws an Exception it is caught by the DLC that will try to failure handle it and move it to *jms:failed*. This is possible, but then it *restoresTheOriginalException* and then transaction handler in Camel will rethrow this and then the TX is marked for rollback. And this you did not handle it, you could not mobe it to jms:failed and then its OK.

So what we want is to alter the restoreExceptionOnExchange  method in DeadLetterChannel, to NOT set the exception. But of course it should be configurable when to do this
 

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46305#action_46305 ]

Hadrian Zbarcea commented on CAMEL-960:
---------------------------------------

@Claus, I got your point.  I agree, the default should be false.

Again, the transform(...) is already possible.  The only thing missing is the failureHandled() api, which could be actually implemented (I guess) to remove the FAILURE_HANDLED_PROPERTY property which contains the exception from the exchange.  I'll probably use an expression there, not just a boolean.  Piece of cake.

I think this fully solves the problem.  Do we agree on the solution?

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46306#action_46306 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

@Hadrian

{code}
if (processor != null) {
  data.failureProcessor = processor;
}
{code}

A good idea, however the default processor in DLC is a Logger that logs at ERROR, so the processor is by default != null.
I don't think logging it at ERROR should be considered as handled. But yet again the default currently in Camel with DLC and TransctedExchanges etc. is up for a revision in Camel 2.0.

With your idea then the catch-22 from above will work. Could you try the change and see how many unit tests breaks ;)

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46308#action_46308 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

PS: I should have logged on IRC ;), but I usually dont do this before leaving for work.

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46307#action_46307 ]

Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-960:
-----------------------------------

+1, just make sure the API also supports setting a boolean directly, not having to wrap it in a Expression such as constant(true) etc. that can be a bit confusing.

> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK

JIRA jira@apache.org
In reply to this post by JIRA jira@apache.org

    [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46309#action_46309 ]

Hadrian Zbarcea commented on CAMEL-960:
---------------------------------------

@Claus, I think we agree on that.

[..] alter the restoreExceptionOnExchange method in DeadLetterChannel, to NOT set the exception, or removing the  FAILURE_HANDLED_PROPERTY property will lead to the same thing: at the end of the day we don't what the exception back in the exchange if failureHandled(true) was invoked during handling, right?

I am just trying to avoid using extra headers.  Maybe reset the value of FAILURE_HANDLED_PROPERTY to null, and then check that in restoreExceptionOnExchange(), not sure yet what works best, but the idea is to not put the exception back in the exchange.  Agree?



> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-960
>             Project: Apache Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Claus Ibsen
>            Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
>             Fix For: 1.5.0, 2.0.0
>
>
> Currently the DeadLetterChannel sets the orignal caused exception on the exchange *after* it has been failure handled. We should support somekind of option to enable/disable this feature. We could support:
> - option on the endpoint to set this for all exchanges
> - support a special header key that end-users can insert per exchange to be more dynamic
> - maybe methods on Exchange to set this more easily
> - maybe some refinements in isFailureHandled() to cater for this
> And we should consider use a better keyname in the DLC where it stores the original exception.
> See nabble:
> http://www.nabble.com/JMS-%2B-Fault-td19778503s22882.html
> We might need to push this for Camel 2.0 but I think it is a feature that end-users would need sooner.
> Any thoughts, please write here?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

12