Don't know for the moment any drawbacks.
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Henryk Konsek <hekon...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Charles, > > > What you suggest corresponds to what we have done for "direct-vm" > component > > Yes, I'm aware that vm and vm-direct components handle static > references. I'm just wondering if this approach has any drawbacks or > corner cases (probably OSGI-related) I'm not aware of. I don't want to > reinvent the wheel and fall into some pitfalls you guys have already > discovered some time ago. > > > Remark : If you plan to share data using a cache, then a solution based > on > > camel-cache, camel-hazelcast, hazelcast, ... could be also the way to go. > > Cache was just an example of some shared state :) . In real > life-solution I would definitely prefer delegation to dedicated cache > component, just as you suggested. > > -- > Henryk Konsek > http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com > -- Charles Moulliard Apache Committer / Sr. Enterprise Architect (RedHat) Twitter : @cmoulliard | Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
