[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1078?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=47970#action_47970
]
James Strachan commented on CAMEL-1078:
---------------------------------------
Hadrian - removing the generics doesn't mean we should remove the specialised
Exchange implementations!
They can be a massive optimisation!
e.g. if you are routing from JMS to JMS and you don't modify the payload at all
- you could just forward the JMS message on. Or you can expose the full JMS
message to JMS aware consumers.
So I don't see why we need to remove the custom exchange implementations if
they add some possible value!
> Do not copy Exchanges at each step to improve performance
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-1078
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1078
> Project: Apache Camel
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: camel-core
> Affects Versions: 1.5.0
> Reporter: Hadrian Zbarcea
> Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> The code in DefaultEndpoint.createExchange(Exchange exchange), calls on
> getExchangeType() to figure out if a new copy of Exchange needs be created.
> The code relies though on the generic argument of the Endpoint type to figure
> out the actual Exchange type. With the generics removed part of CAMEL-872,
> getExchangeType() always returns null, forcing a copy every time.
> There is no real need to extend Exchange, so the proposal for this to make
> the Exchange final and move the component specific bits, if any, in the
> Message.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
