Mailing-List: contact issues-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@camel.apache.org
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:32:33 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Daniel (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: issues@camel.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12747660.1413185277000.251653.1413185553808@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12747660.1413185277000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.12747660.1413185277000@Atlassian.JIRA>
 <JIRA.12747660.1413185277645@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Updated] (CAMEL-7905) New option to ignore missing
 consumers on direct endpoints
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-7905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Daniel updated CAMEL-7905:
--------------------------
    Description: 
Currently a {{DirectConsumerNotAvailableException}} or {{DirectVmConsumerNotAvailableException}} is thrown when a message is send via a direct endoint and no consumer has been set up for this endpoint.

I a current scenario I want to use camel to loosely couple two components using direct endpoints that _might_ be consumed by some bean. Especially there should be no dependency from the producing component to the consuming component. However, if there is a consumer, messages sent from the producer must be consumed synchronously in the same thread to preserve the transaction context of the producer. That why I chose {{direct}} for the producer's endpoint.

What is meant by "the messages might be consumed" is that the consuming component might not be deployed, when the consumer produces the first messages, or perhaps will never be deployed. I know there is the {{block}} option for the {{direct}} component but I don't want the producer to wait for the consumer as it might take some time (possibly forever) for the consumer to be available.

I think this is a very common scenario for a messaging system and I was surprised not to find an easy out-of-the-box way to handle this with camel. That's why I think an additional option {{failIfNoConsumers}} (similar to the option for the seda component) for the {{direct}} and {{direct-vm}} component would be very handy.

  was:
Currently a {{DirectConsumerNotAvailableException}} or {{DirectVmConsumerNotAvailableException}} is thrown when a message is send via a direct endoint and no consumer has been set up for this endpoint.

I a current scenario I want to use camel to loosely couple two components using direct endpoints that _might_ be consumed by some bean. Especially there should be no dependency from the producing component to the consuming component. However, if there is a consumer, messages send from the producer must be consumed synchronously in the same thread to preserve the transaction context of the producer. That why I chose {{direct}} for the producer's endpoint.

What is meant by "the messages might be consumed" is that the consuming component might not be deployed, when the consumer produces the first messages, or perhaps will never be deployed. I know there is the {{block}} option for the {{direct}} component but I don't want the producer to wait for the consumer as it might take some for the consumer to be available.

I think this is a very common scenario for a messaging system and I was surprised not to find an easy out-of-the-box way to handle this with camel. That's why I think an additional option {{failIfNoConsumers}} (similar to the option for the seda component) for the {{direct}} and {{direct-vm}} component would be very handy.


> New option to ignore missing consumers on direct endpoints
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-7905
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-7905
>             Project: Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 2.14.0
>            Reporter: Daniel
>
> Currently a {{DirectConsumerNotAvailableException}} or {{DirectVmConsumerNotAvailableException}} is thrown when a message is send via a direct endoint and no consumer has been set up for this endpoint.
> I a current scenario I want to use camel to loosely couple two components using direct endpoints that _might_ be consumed by some bean. Especially there should be no dependency from the producing component to the consuming component. However, if there is a consumer, messages sent from the producer must be consumed synchronously in the same thread to preserve the transaction context of the producer. That why I chose {{direct}} for the producer's endpoint.
> What is meant by "the messages might be consumed" is that the consuming component might not be deployed, when the consumer produces the first messages, or perhaps will never be deployed. I know there is the {{block}} option for the {{direct}} component but I don't want the producer to wait for the consumer as it might take some time (possibly forever) for the consumer to be available.
> I think this is a very common scenario for a messaging system and I was surprised not to find an easy out-of-the-box way to handle this with camel. That's why I think an additional option {{failIfNoConsumers}} (similar to the option for the seda component) for the {{direct}} and {{direct-vm}} component would be very handy.


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)