camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Charles Moulliard <>
Subject Re: EIP - Message Broker Pattern
Date Wed, 07 Oct 2009 07:31:34 GMT
You are right David. Implementing a scalable and reliable platform is
certainly the most difficult thing to do and consume a lot of time /
resources between teams involved in infrastructure management.
Personnaly, I think that the scenario must be analyzed regarding to
the project or if there is a decision about the company to work with
ActiveMq as the global queueing engine, than you have to consider the
approach described here
( very carefully.

Other solutions could be investigated to support scalability in an
environment like :

- NMR clustering :
- Loadbalance requests (through a HTTP proxy) to camel
endpoints/routes using RESTFull services
- ...


Charles Moulliard
Senior Enterprise Architect
Apache Camel Committer

blog :
twitter :

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 8:43 AM, tnabil <> wrote:
> I went through some of the content and what I came to understand was that in
> a "store and forward" topology, manual replication of queues and topics
> would be required; please correct me if I'm wrong.
> It also seems that a lot of configuration and fine tuning would be required.
> I'm not sure if more expensive products like IBM Message Broker would
> provide visual tools that would make this task easier.
> What I feel, though, is that the only reason one would resort to such an
> approach would be (as also mentioned in the documentation) that the borkers
> need to be distributed across a WAN. Otherwise, the overhead of configuring
> the store and forward network seems to be a lot worse than having everything
> in one broker. For performance, of course, clustering can be done.
> Your thoughts?
> David Roussel wrote:
>> Some of the issues are discussed here:
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at

View raw message