The route I am currently using is:
from("activemq:AnnotateQueue").setHeader("HasHandler",
hasHandlerExpression).to("activemq:TOOL.DEFAULT");;
where hasHandlerExpression is a class I have implemented. It contains the
following method:
public Object evaluate(Exchange exch) {
Message msg = exch.getIn();
String key = (String)msg.getHeader("DocGuid");
// Odd numbered docs have a handler
String handlerStr = RoutingTable.getDestination(key);
boolean hasHandler = (null != handlerStr) &&
handlerStr.equals("true");
msg.setHeader("HasHandler", hasHandler);
return "" + hasHandler;
Finally RoutingTable.getDestination is simply a static method doing a
hashmap.get.
Hope this helps.
-Dominic
What route were you using? That will us focus and the possible leaks
better.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Possible-memory-leak-when-using-Camel-in-ActiveMQ-tf4346921s22882.html#a12387136
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
