Claus Ibsen-2 wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Feel free to create a ticket if you would like such a feature in Camel
> with the mina being able to correlate. Maybe there is something we can
> do.
> But yet again JMS is much better for reliable messaging, but sometimes
> low level TCP could be feasible instead if bringing in a JMS broker in
> the server farm.
>
> You can also try other remoting protocols such as RMI, file based :),
> XMPP, HTTP, REST, SOAP etc.
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Claus Ibsen <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:08 PM, mam1 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Claus Ibsen-2 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 6:21 PM, mam1 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a multithreaded environment using Camel's Mina component with
>>>>> Spring
>>>>> Remoting as following:
>>>>>
>>>>> <camel:camelContext>
>>>>> <camel:proxy id="test_client"
>>>>> serviceInterface="a.b.c.TestService"
>>>>> serviceUrl="direct:test_service"/>
>>>>>
>>>>> <camel:route id="test_service_mina_route">
>>>>> <camel:from uri="direct:test_service"/>
>>>>> <camel:to
>>>>> uri="mina:tcp://localhost:8000?textline=false&minaLogger=true&timeout=100000&lazySessionCreation=true&sync=true&exchangePattern=InOut&transferExchange=true"/>
>>>>> </camel:route>
>>>>> </camel:camelContext>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am getting unexpected results. One calling thread consumes a result
>>>>> intended for different calling thread, etc. It looks like there is no
>>>>> correlation between request and response. I am using camel 1.6.0.
>>>> For reliable request/reply with correlation I would advice to use JMS.
>>>>
>>>> I assume you use Camel on both the client and server side since you
>>>> have option: transferExchange=true that will send Camel API objects to
>>>> the server.
>>>>
>>>> Can you show the server side as well? eg the server that listen on port
>>>> 8000.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Did anybody encounter similar problem? What am i missing and what is a
>>>>> solution for this issue?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Camel-Mina-Request-Response-correlation-tp22413710p22413710.html
>>>>> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Claus Ibsen
>>>> Apache Camel Committer
>>>>
>>>> Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
>>>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for reply.
>>>
>>> Camel is used on both sides as you correctly assumed. Server side
>>> configuration looks like following:
>>>
>>> <beans:bean id="test_service" class="a.b.c.TestServiceImpl"/>
>>>
>>> <camel:camelContext >
>>> <camel:export id="service_proxy"
>>> serviceRef="test_service"
>>> serviceInterface="a.b.c.TestService"
>>>
>>> uri="mina:tcp://localhost:8000?textline=false&minaLogger=true&timeout=100000&lazySessionCreation=true&sync=true&exchangePattern=InOut&transferExchange=true"/>
>>> </camel:camelContext>
>>>
>>> Is correlation already implemented for JMS (camel 1.6) component or
>>> there is
>>> an additional work that has to be done to enable correlation? Can we
>>> expect
>>> reliable communication using Mina component?
>> Yes its a core piece in JMS to be able to correlate JMS messages.
>> There is a JMSCorrelationID header for that.
>>
>> There is a getter on the JMSMessage object for it:
>> message.getJMSCorrelationID();
>>
>> As its a key piece in JMS its implemented by the JMS Broker. Messaging
>> using JMS should be considered for reliable messaging.
>> And you get all the features from the JMS brokers, such as persistent
>> queues, failover, recovery, redelivery and much much more.
>>
>> Check out ActiveMQ
>> http://activemq.apache.org/
>>
>>
>> MINA is used for low level socket communication such as UDP and TCP.
>> It shouldn't really be used for a poor mans substitute for JMS.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thansks.
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Camel-Mina-Request-Response-correlation-tp22413710p22434965.html
>>> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Claus Ibsen
>> Apache Camel Committer
>>
>> Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Claus Ibsen
> Apache Camel Committer
>
> Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
>
>
Thank you very much. I tried camel-(jms/activemq) components and it works as
advertised.
Like you said Mina is a low level performant networking framework and in
some cases the overhead, that JMS or other high level standards imply, is
unnecessary. In addition a synchronous call assumes correlation between
request and response. I'd really like to see camel-mina supporting
correlated synchronous invocation as it seems to be a feasible match in
terms of functionality and performance.
Thanks again. I'll experiment with other components like you suggested.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Camel-Mina-Request-Response-correlation-tp22413710p22455735.html
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
