[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1650?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=52113#action_52113
]
Claus Ibsen commented on CAMEL-1650:
------------------------------------
I add the confirm key to the repo interface. This allows you to be able to
impl. your timeout version.
{code}
MyRepo repo = new MyRepo();
repo.setTimeout(20000);
{code}
And then use MyRepo with the idempotent consumer EIP.
Camel will eagerly add and then when the exchange is done call the confirm.
In case of failure it will call the remove instead.
I also added an {{eager}} option so you can turn it on/off. Its enabled by
default.
If disabled then Camel will add when the exchange is complete.
trunk: 782534.
> Race condition in IdempotentConsumer
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-1650
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1650
> Project: Apache Camel
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: camel-core
> Affects Versions: 2.0-M1
> Reporter: Oliver Hecker
> Assignee: Claus Ibsen
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: IdempotentConsumerTest.java
>
>
> A possible possible race condition exists in the IdempotentConsumer
> implementation:
> The code first checks in the MessageIdRepository if the message was already
> processed. If not then it processes the message and
> afterwards adds the id to the repository. (See also
> http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1451). There is no locking
> between the check with "contains" and the insert with "add". So if multiple
> threads/instances try this in parallel for the same id, then
> it might happen that more than one finds the id not yet contained in the
> repository and the same message is processed multiple
> times.
> I enclose an extended version of IdempotentConsumerTest which illustrates the
> problem.
> It is important to note that even if the test demonstrates the issue with an
> MemoryIdempotentRepository a solution should also
> address the case of a database based respository in a clustered environment.
> So this might imply that some locking mechanism on the
> database is required.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
