camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Taylor Gautier <>
Subject Re: Camel TCP receiver endpoint
Date Sun, 09 Mar 2008 17:25:58 GMT

georgiosgeorgiadis wrote:
> I have found out that the message properties and headers soes not seem to
> be passed when using MINA TCP communication. In direct pojo or bean,
> everything seems working.


Is it a hard requirement that your communication happen over a direct TCP
connection?  I just noticed your thread after posting a message about
getting a queue clustered via Terracotta wrapped as a Component.  The effect
is the same - two VMs can easily pass messages using a strategy similar to
seda, except the queue is clustered so the producer can be in one VM and the
consumer in another.

I tested out Headers and Properties to make sure they are passed properly,
and they work fine.

I posted a message with a demo app here:

To be sure, this is a much different solution than a raw TCP connection -
Terracotta requires a server and is built for clustering, not raw message
passing from peer to peer - for the moment.  However you do gain some pretty
big benefits - your messages can be seamlessly persistent, changes to the
messages can easily be communicated back to the producer very efficiently
(if you need such a thing) and more.

Anyway...I don't mean to make this a vendor post (I do work for Terracotta
but it's 100% OSS and my implementation is too) - I just thought you might
be interested.
View this message in context:
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at

View raw message