InfoSec812 commented on issue #3888:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-quarkus/issues/3888#issuecomment-1416827782

   @jamesnetherton  Two questions for you with regards to this.
   
   1. How would the Camel Context decide which route(s) are non-blocking and 
eligible? Seems like the discussion above suggests a parameter on the component.
   2. Even if we were able to easily determine the blocking possibility, what 
does this gain? The blocking threadpool is going to be there anyhow, so it 
really doesn't save much if anything. Also, it provides a convenient foot-gun 
for people to shoot themselves with when they later change/amend a route and 
add a blocking step.
   
   
   So, thinking this through, we would need to add an optional (and preferably 
default to off) option to run the route on the event loop thread. It's entirely 
likely that Vert.x/Quarkus will throw an error if a user later adds a blocking 
operation to the route, so it shouldn't be difficult to debug if they do.
   
   The other side of this discussion is "are there already idiomatic ways to 
handle this in Camel today"... Perhaps handing off to a `vertx:<address>` 
eventbus or a `seda` endpoint which would pretty much immediately release the 
worker thread. 


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to