camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Claus Ibsen (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (CAMEL-960) DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
Date Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:39:52 GMT


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
- 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

Also on the *onException* that I think is a cool feature

And then if possible

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);



> DeadLetterChannel - option to mark the exchange as failure handled and that its OK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: CAMEL-960
>                 URL:
>             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:
> 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.

View raw message