Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of tabish121@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.221.200 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=subject:from:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id
         :mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=olAax/hfhizYmPgkMsuoqBKfvK0t+aEx46sxc3p4C8dzWeGvl5Y0t0MbWX8shAV6l4
         uME5hjqWjnCc9bV+nRkTYUCK7Kneaeg6e9Lm8NTOmOS4C7XsadB8WIL/6UMcfSzgOkAI
         oTzmB95XYU9UjC6xwPABoEIMctt1sdprFermg=
Subject: Re: Tranactional Sessions from JMS Producer to CMS Consumer
From: Timothy Bish <tabish121@gmail.com>
To: users@activemq.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <25295367.post@talk.nabble.com>
References: <25295367.post@talk.nabble.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:25:53 -0400
Message-Id: <1252092353.2906.2.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 07:27 -0700, GForce wrote:
> Hopefully I can get some assistance here for this particular issue we are
> running into.  First let me provide some background.  Our system is a pretty
> standard SOA system.  We have both Java and C++ services attached to
> ServiceMix.  We are using Camel to route the messages around the bus.  There
> are certain portions of the overall routes we want to make transactional,
> you know data integrity and all that.  Anyway, we have about 8 C++ services
> attached to the bus using CMS.  Those all appear to be going through the
> same connection and session.  This means that if we want to put
> transactional messaging on one service we do it for all of them, as the
> transactional setting is defined in the connection.  We don't want to make
> all the C++ services to be transactional and we are unsure how to make that
> happen.  

CMS Clients like Java client have transacted Sessions, not transacted
connections, so the services need to use individual Sessions in order
for you to mix and match which is transacted and which is not.  

> 
> Now the question, how can we set it up so that one C++ service can be
> transactional while the remaining 7 are non-transactional.  Also, if there
> are parameters set inside the Camel endpoints pointing to the C++ services
> will those parameters be sent to the C++ services?  Our Camel rules are
> defined using Spring in Java by the way.  Any help is greatly appreciated. 
> Thanks in advance.

Regards
Tim.
-- 
Tim Bish
http://fusesource.com
http://timbish.blogspot.com/