Hi Omar, thanks for your feedback, much appreciated.

I agree with you, Camel has a much broader scope and offers greater
flexibility. Here I specifically talk about CDC solutions so the
comparison is on that specific use case. I tried to make your point in
the last couple of lines, but it can be reinforced.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 9:29 AM Omar Al-Safi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Federico,
>
> Looks good to me! However, in the consideration part, I wouldn't compare
> Kafka Streams with Camel use cases, they both solve different problems with
> some overlap. However, the Camel use case would make sense (to me at
> least), for any integration that doesn't need Kafka Connect coupling, e.g:
> sending data to queue, or even send the CDC streams to another database or
> doing rule based routing using Camel in case you don't like Kafka SMTs
> ..etc. Other than that, looks good!.
>
> Regards,
> Omar
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 9:12 AM Federico Valeri <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Cameleers, recently I did some experiments with CDC using Debezium
> > engine [1]. The main objective here was to compare KafkaConnect
> > configuration-driven approach with Camel code-driven approach.
> >
> > I wanted to share this work with you primarily to have some feedback
> > and then, if you are interested, I could also create a blog post out
> > of it. One thing that would be great is to replace the
> > JmsSinkConnector with the new CamelKafkaConnector (sjms-component), as
> > soon as it will be ready for KafkaConnect running in distributed mode.
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/fvaleri/cdc
> >

Reply via email to