Yes I understand the purpose of the timeout but what if an exchange has just been read by the SJMS consumer and the timeout is triggered? The processing of the timeout commits the transaction while the exchange could still be inflight and could fail.
In general, the commit of the transaction triggered by the timeout should know if an exchange is still inflight and only commit (or rollback in case the exchange is failed) the transaction when the exchange is completed. I mean transaction are meant to not loose any messages. But in the SJMS implementation, it seems that a message could be lost if the timeout is triggered when an exchange is not completed. Am I right? -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/SJMS-implementation-Batch-Consumer-tp5741291p5741530.html Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
