Yes this is similar to what I suggested. The task via MessageInjector calls a URL that is actually Synapse Proxy - to initiate the task. This is cleaner than the filter.
What I mean by strange is that Synapse is all about scripting and using sequences... Then to do a task we go low level and basically call Quartz. Why not just have an external Web service using Quartz call Synapse. I would expect Synapse to have tasking based aorund higher level concepts like a sequence or proxy. For example a file dump is an event that triggers a VFS:File proxy. Why not a timer event that triggers either a sequence or a proxy too. Calling Java is an ugly approach that means we have to create hacks to get what we want. Andreas Veithen-2 wrote: > > 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. >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Tasks-are-strange.-tp22406367p22424956.html Sent from the Synapse - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
