camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Charles Moulliard <ch0...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Shared static members in components
Date Tue, 12 Feb 2013 08:05:40 GMT
Don't know for the moment any drawbacks.


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Henryk Konsek <hekonsek@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Charles,
>
> > What you suggest corresponds to what we have done for "direct-vm"
> component
>
> Yes, I'm aware that vm and vm-direct components handle static
> references. I'm just wondering if this approach has any drawbacks or
> corner cases (probably OSGI-related) I'm not aware of. I don't want to
> reinvent the wheel and fall into some pitfalls you guys have already
> discovered some time ago.
>
> > Remark : If you plan to share data using a cache, then a solution based
> on
> > camel-cache, camel-hazelcast, hazelcast, ... could be also the way to go.
>
> Cache was just an example of some shared state :) . In real
> life-solution I would definitely prefer delegation to dedicated cache
> component, just as you suggested.
>
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>



-- 
Charles Moulliard
Apache Committer / Sr. Enterprise Architect (RedHat)
Twitter : @cmoulliard | Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message