Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of claus.ibsen@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.215.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1317407473894-4858019.post@n5.nabble.com>
References: <1313990088144-4722190.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <1317407473894-4858019.post@n5.nabble.com>
From: Claus Ibsen <claus.ibsen@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 09:05:10 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAGB5yNkfPtPDEsTcvxyLa2_NDr5saTKfZ_ZJO3MtGR6XVSaf1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Thread pool for components in Camel
To: users@camel.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:31 PM, diwakar <diwakar.jois@nsn.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Thanks for the reply. With async and defaultThreadPool=
Profile, is
> Camel support for parallel processing as good as Servicemix 3.x. Are ther=
e
> any known limitations in Camel over JBI(Servicemix3.x). Is there any good
> reason to use Servicemix JBI instead of Camel.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Please let me know your comment.
>

No JBI is dying/dead.
http://gnodet.blogspot.com/2010/12/thoughts-about-servicemix.html

For new projects you should consider *not* to use JBI, unless you are
already use JBI a lot,
and are happy with it as is.

We recommend to use Camel as replacement for JBI in SMX.


> With Best Regards,
> Diwakar
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Thread-po=
ol-for-components-in-Camel-tp4722190p4858019.html
> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>


--=20
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
FuseSource
Email: cibsen@fusesource.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/