[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-10343?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15526472#comment-15526472
 ] 

Nicolas Duffillot commented on CAMEL-10343:
-------------------------------------------

Andrea,

I've made a minor change in my local camel-netty4 (2.17.4-SNAPSHOT) :

1 new param in NettyConfiguration :
    @UriParam(label = "advanced", defaultValue = "false")
    private boolean allowSerializedHeaders;

1 line changed in NettyPayloadHelper :
- return DefaultExchangeHolder.marshal(exchange);
+ return DefaultExchangeHolder.marshal(exchange, true, 
endpoint.getConfiguration().isAllowSerializedHeaders());

As I'm not familiar with this, how am I supposed to do now ?
Thanks for your help,
Nicolas

> Camel Netty4 allowSerializedHeaders
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMEL-10343
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-10343
>             Project: Camel
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: camel-netty4
>    Affects Versions: 2.17.2
>            Reporter: Nicolas Duffillot
>            Assignee: Andrea Cosentino
>              Labels: patch
>   Original Estimate: 4h
>  Remaining Estimate: 4h
>
> When transferExchange = true, NettyPayloadHelper.getIn(NettyEndpoint, 
> Exchange) calls DefaultExchangeHolder.marshal(exchange) that calls 
> DefaultExchangeHolder.marshal(exchange, true, false);
> Third parameter "allowSerializedHeaders" is forced to false and there seems 
> to be no way to call the marshal method with this parameter set to true.
> Because of that, the marshalling of the exchange properties doesn't include 
> the serializable pojos as the "DefaultExchangeHolder.getValidHeaderValue" 
> method excludes those serailizable object when allowSerializedHeaders=false :
> if (allowSerializedHeaders) {
>     if (headerValue instanceof Serializable) {
>         return headerValue;
>     }
> }
> Hoping to be clear enough.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to