camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Piotr Jagielski <pjagiel...@o2.pl>
Subject Re: Aggregator/resequencer reliability
Date Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:37:24 GMT

So, when I configure JmsComponent to use transactions as in
http://activemq.apache.org/camel/transactional-client.html and then
configure route:

from("activemq:queue:a")..aggregator(xpath("/msg/id").stringResult()).batchSize(10).batchTimeout(100000)
....
or 
from("activemq:queue:a").resequencer(xpath("//priority").numberResult()).stream(new
StreamResequencerConfig(10, 10000))
...
 
In case of system failure during 100000 batch timeout, after restart
messages will be processed again? That's what i'm looking for..

Regards


James.Strachan wrote:
> 
> There's 2 ways to do a reliable resequencer/aggregators. One is to use
> persistence and XA; the other is to use batching and transactions
> (i.e. on a failure, the transaction rolls back and the entire batch is
> replayed). The latter was the first option implemented; using
> transaction batches is less flexible - but it does avoid XA.
> 
> We could maybe still use persistence and avoid XA...
> http://activemq.apache.org/should-i-use-xa.html
> 
> using the Idempotent Consumer to avoid duplicates?
> http://activemq.apache.org/camel/idempotent-consumer.html
> 
> On 11/04/2008, Roman Kalukiewicz <roman.kalukiewicz@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2008/4/10, Piotr Jagielski <pjagielski@o2.pl>:
>>
>> >  I'm not sure whether stateful processors e.g. aggregator or
>> resequencer are
>>  >  persistent and reliable in case of system crash.
>>  >  I'm using Camel inside Servicemix. When i send some messages which
>> are
>>  >  passed through aggregator and resequences i notice that enclosing JMS
>>  >  session is closed and JMS message is commited.
>>  >  Anyone can help?
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately current aggregator and resequencer patterns are not
>>  persisten and reliable.
>>  Would you like to create JIRA issue for this to track this requirement?
>>
>>
>>  >  There has been a post already but with no answer:
>>  > 
>> http://www.nabble.com/Better-Aggregator-support-td12564277s22882.html#a12564277
>>
>>
>> In fact this post asks two different questions - one for persistence
>>  and second one for 'completedPredicate()' that is already implemented.
>>
>>
>>  Roman
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> James
> -------
> http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
> 
> Open Source Integration
> http://open.iona.com
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Aggregator-resequencer-reliability-tp16617652s22882p16648595.html
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message