Willem's solution may get me by for now, although I agree that
throwing an exception makes the most sense. The reason I asked was to
see if there was any other commonly accepted solution for this scenario.
Throwing an exception will send the message to Camel's default
DeadLetterChannel, which will cause the message to be redelivered to
myProcessorA at least 5 times. It stops the message from going any
further in the route, true, but it's very noisy, and the message
eventually ends up in the log. Can I customize this behavior via XML?
(eg: customize DLC, or intercept the message before arriving there)
Last time I checked, this was still a feature not yet ported from the
DSL.
- aaron
On Mar 20, 2008, at 11:08 AM, James Strachan wrote:
Throw an exception?
On 20/03/2008, Aaron Crickenberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Say I have the following route defined in XML:
<route>
<from uri="seda:start" />
<process ref="myProcessorA" />
<process ref="myProcessorB" />
<to uri="seda:end" />
<route>
If the myProcessorA processor recognizes that a message it's
processing doesn't make business sense, what could it do to prevent
the message from going any further in the route?
- aaron
--
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
Open Source Integration
http://open.iona.com
