The message injector indeed doesn't allow you to specify the sequence to execute. However Paul once described [1] a pattern that can be used to get around this limitation.
[1] http://markmail.org/thread/kfqxxqwrjwzohglm On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 03:54, kimhorn <[email protected]> wrote: > > Seems strange that a task calls a Java class. Would it not be better for it > to > start a <sequence>. > > I want to call two web services in a chain that also require a java call, > every 20 minutes. > A task is the solution for the timing bit. I want to start a complex > sequence. > > Part of the sequecne calls a Java class that adds BASIC auth info (username > and password) to TRANSAPORT. > > With a task I can't call two Java classes, one to inject Message and one to > add AUTH. > > I could to edit the Message Injector class to also add in the BASIC auth > headers. > So create a new injector with basic auth properties too. This also is a very > poor solution. > > At the moment I am using the task message injector to call a Synapse proxy > that runs > my sequence; as a named proxy. This sequence builds the message payload and > calls the Java to add > BASIC Auth headers. This seems a round about and indirect way to solve the > problem. > > As I can embed a java class in a sequence, having a task call a sequence > would > be a more general solution than having it just call a java class. > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Tasks-are-strange.-tp22406367p22406367.html > Sent from the Synapse - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
