Yes, this should always be possible. But registering a (default) store
in the Camel Context might be an alternative, e.g. like it is done
with a ThreadPoolFactory. If you don't explicitly provide one, the
default one is taken.
(the other) Christian
2013/2/21 Christian Müller <christian.muel...@gmail.com>:
> Shouldn't it be possible to configure the store?
> Something like:
>
> from("...")
> .claimCheck(myMessageStoreInstance)
> .to("....");
>
> and
>
> from("...")
> .setHeader(Exchange.CLAIM_CHECK, constant("my claim check id"))
> .claim(myMessageStoreInstance)
> .to("....");
>
> By default (if no message store instance is configured) we could use a
> memory message store.
>
> Best,
> Christian
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Henryk Konsek <hekon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > You are invited add, comment, criticize etc.
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> Looks good :) .
>>
>> I've added some examples to Wiki demonstrating my vision of the usage
>> of Claim Check EIP.
>>
>> // Setting default message store for route:
>> defaultMessageStore(myStore);
>>
>> // Claim Check EIP store:
>> // 1) Store body.
>> // 2) Set body to null.
>> // 3) Set Exchange.CLAIM_CHECK header to unique claim id.
>> from(...).claimCheck().to(...);
>>
>> // Claim Check EIP read:
>> // 1) Lookup for the Exchange.CLAIM_CHECK header value.
>> // 2) Read the message.
>> // 3) Set body to the value fetched from the store.
>> from(...).setHeader(Exchange.CLAIM_CHECK, const("id")).claim().to(...);
>>
>> I'm curious if my claim check DSL design is similar to yours.
>>
>> Best regards.
>>
>> --
>> Henryk Konsek
>> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
