activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Redelivery not happening at the point of failure
Date Sat, 15 Oct 2011 06:51:52 GMT
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Venkatesh Laguduva
<lbvenkatesh@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Claus, we are kind of divided our route - one as transacted and
> another one as not transacted - so that we be in line with activemq
> redelivery mechanism.
>
> Btw, Camel redelivery mechanism seems beneficial as it re-starts at the
> point of failure, why not activemq go that way?
>

AMQ keeps the message in queues, and can redeliver the message from the queues.
AMQ supports persistent message store and can thus "survive" server crashes etc.

Camel on the other hand routes the messages, and is able to redeliver
during routing.
However this causes the Camel redelivery to be in-memory only. And thus you will
lose the message in case of server crash.

The Camel redelivery works on any kind of message, so you can pickup a
file, and try
to upload it to a remote FTP server. And in case of problems Camel can delivery.
AMQ only works with messaging.

So they both have pros/cons.


> Thanks & Regards
> Venkatesh Laguduva
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ibsen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You have two different systems capable of doing redeliveries
>> - ActiveMQ
>> - Camel
>>
>> ActiveMQ will redeliver from the beginning of the route again
>> Camel will redeliver at the point of the error
>>
>> ActiveMQ can only redeliver JMS messages (or the other formats it supports)
>> Camel can redeliver any kind of message.
>>
>> So when using ActiveMQ and transacted, then its recommended to not use
>> Camel redelivery at the same time.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Venkatesh Laguduva
>> <lbvenkatesh@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Well Torsten, we use Camel and redelivery always happen at the point of
>> > failure.
>> >
>> > Thanks & Regards
>> > Venkatesh Laguduva
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Torsten Mielke <torsten@fusesource.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Oct 11, 2011, at 2:10 PM, Venkatesh Laguduva wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > this time, message was tried from the start of the route instead of
>> >> trying
>> >> > from the point of failure
>> >>
>> >> Not sure I fully understand you but every message that is retried will
>> be
>> >> sent through the entire Camel route again.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Torsten Mielke
>> >> torsten@fusesource.com
>> >> tmielke@blogspot.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Claus Ibsen
>> -----------------
>> FuseSource
>> Email: cibsen@fusesource.com
>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>> Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
>>
>



-- 
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
FuseSource
Email: cibsen@fusesource.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/

Mime
View raw message