camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Claus Ibsen <>
Subject Re: Discussion around the bug CAMEL-6685
Date Fri, 30 Aug 2013 12:16:40 GMT
If you do not want the RejectedExcutionException to be logged in the
logs after the camelcontext has been attempted to shutdown.

Then we could consider adding a new option to shutdown strategy to
allow end users to configure that Camel should suppress logging after
camel context has been attempted to shutdown.

And to re-iterate Camel does not try to "go to the next processor"
that is why the routing engine throws the rejected exception.

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Antoine DESSAIGNE
<> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> Earlier today I created a new jira issue [1] on something that I consider
> is a bug. It was triaged and marked as "Not a problem". I don't agree with
> this so I'm starting this discussion either to better understand why it's
> not a bug or to reopen it. I thought this mailing list was a better place
> for discussion than the comment section of a jira issue.
> Let me explain what I did, what happened and what I was expected and why I
> was expecting this.
> Basically I forced the shutdown of a context that was processing a message.
> And by doing that I'm aware that I may lose some data, and it's my expected
> behavior.
> In the console, after the shutdown you can see that the DefaultTypeConverter
> is starting up and then an java.util.concurrent.RejectedExecutionException
> is thrown.
> But since the context is stopped, I don't want:
> * the TypeConverter to start, it has no meaning since I don't want to
> process any message and as far I can tell it's not cleared afterwards.
> * an exception telling me that it cannot process the message, since it's
> what I wanted I shouldn't have any exception.
> In more real-world use-case (not this bug simple reproduction use case), I
> noticed that after a force shutdown the context was still manipulating data
> which I didn't want before crashing
> In my opinion, if the context is stopping it should try to finish the
> in-processing messages. But if the context is stopped, it shouldn't try at
> all to continue.
> It may not be easy to stop the processing especially when it's asynchronous
> but camel should try to do so. Camel should not even try to go to the next
> processor and it shouldn't throw any exception when it cannot go to the
> next processor.
> But maybe I don't quite understand the force shutdown feature and this is
> not a bug. Can you give me your insights on this matter ?
> Thanks a lot,
> Antoine.
> [1]

Claus Ibsen
Red Hat, Inc.
Twitter: davsclaus
Author of Camel in Action:

View raw message