That's what I've been staring at! :) Here's what I'm thinking I'm going to need to write. I need an async processor that remembers the AsyncCallback and associates it with a correlation id. Then, when another exchange comes in that has the same correlation id, it will lookup the previous callback and say that it's done. I have a lot of questions, though. I've never had to get so "down and dirty" with Camel before. The components have just worked for me "off the shelf."
1. Do I just copy the input message of the Exchange that comes in second to the output message of the originating exchange? 2. How do I do a timeout for the original caller (the CXF request)? 3. How do I detect that the caller has timed out if they do? I'm sure I'll have more questions, but these are the ones off the top of my head. On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Taariq Levack <taar...@gmail.com> wrote: > James I think the rest of your puzzle is solved by Camel's async API, > you might have to check if your task is done, maybe your > requestResponse populates some collection of responses and provides > some API to return the response given a correlationID. > Stare at the async docs [1] a few more times and I'm sure you'll find > your answer. > > [1] http://camel.apache.org/async.html > > Taariq > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:16 PM, James Carman > <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: >> No worries! Thank you for your help. It helped me understand a bit >> more about how these aggregators work.. However, I still don't >> understand how to take care of my problem. I guess I'm going to have >> to roll my own processor or something. >> >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Taariq Levack <taar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hmmm. >>> Maybe others can help with that if it's possible, I haven't had to wrestle >>> with it. >>> >>> In my case it is actually a cxf service too, but it's asynchronous and I >>> send the response once I have it, indicating either timeout or the actual >>> response. >>> >>> Sorry I responded to your question without going back to see your other >>> posts. >>> >>> Taariq >>> >>> On 16 Aug 2011, at 10:33 PM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In my case, the originating request comes from CXF. How do I send the >>>> aggregated response back to CXF? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Taariq Levack <taar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> The consumer that handles the aggregated/timed-out request or response. >>>>> >>>>> I have to resend a few times if it's the request, I simply feed it back >>>>> into "direct:socketRequestRoute" with the header for the number of retry >>>>> attempts incremented. >>>>> If it's the response I can forward to some process. >>>>> >>>>> Taariq >>>>> >>>>> On 16 Aug 2011, at 10:18 PM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> What's listening on the: >>>>>> >>>>>> to("direct:requestResponse") >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Taariq Levack <taar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Sure >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You can of course solve what I've described many ways, but I'll >>>>>>> explain using 3 routes as that's what I used. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This first route is the main route I mentioned earlier, so you send >>>>>>> your socket messages here and it's multicast to both the aggregator >>>>>>> and to the socket. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> from("direct:socketRequestRoute").multicast().to("direct:requestResponseAggregator", >>>>>>> "someOutboundSocketEndpoint"); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This next route will aggregate, both requests and responses are sent >>>>>>> here as you envisaged. >>>>>>> from("direct:requestResponseAggregator"). >>>>>>> .aggregate(header("someCorrellationId"), >>>>>>> requestResponseAggregator) >>>>>>> .completionSize(2) >>>>>>> .completionTimeout(5000) >>>>>>> .to("direct:requestResponse"); //Here you can send the >>>>>>> "aggregated" message, in my case it's only the response I forward >>>>>>> unless there's a timeout, then I forward the request of course. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Finally the route that consumes the socket responses. >>>>>>> from(someInboundSocketEndpoint).processRef("headerEnricher").to("direct:requestResponseAggregator"); >>>>>>> //this headerEnricher doesn't have to be a processor, you have many >>>>>>> options to add a header. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If that's not clear feel free to ask. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Taariq >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:30 PM, James Carman >>>>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> Care to share an example? I'm not picturing it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Taariq Levack <taar...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi James >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I did that too for what it's worth. >>>>>>>>> I send the message to a route that forwards to both the aggregator >>>>>>>>> and to the socket. >>>>>>>>> When the response comes in I use an enricher to add the ID to the >>>>>>>>> headers and then forward to the aggregator. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Taariq >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 16 Aug 2011, at 8:55 PM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Willem, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your help. I don't think this is doing exactly what I >>>>>>>>>> need, though. The real trick here is the asynchronous nature of the >>>>>>>>>> "server" on the other end of this situation. I thought about using >>>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>> aggregator to make sure the response gets matched up with the request >>>>>>>>>> using a correlation id. The aggregator wouldn't aggregate multiple >>>>>>>>>> responses together into one, it would just make sure it matches the >>>>>>>>>> correct response with its request. Does this sound like a valid >>>>>>>>>> approach? If so, how the heck do I go about it? :) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> James >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Willem Jiang >>>>>>>>>> <willem.ji...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Hi James, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Camel async process engine already provides the way that you want. >>>>>>>>>>> You can take a look at the camel-cxf code[1][2] for some example. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1]http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/camel/trunk/components/camel-cxf/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/component/cxf/CxfConsumer.java?view=markup >>>>>>>>>>> [2]http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/camel/trunk/components/camel-cxf/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/component/cxf/CxfProducer.java?view=markup >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/7/11 1:29 AM, James Carman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Zbarcea >>>>>>>>>>>> Hadrian<hzbar...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi James, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I hope I understand your scenario correctly. Here are a few >>>>>>>>>>>>> thoughts. I >>>>>>>>>>>>> assume want to use camel-netty [1] to send messages to your sever >>>>>>>>>>>>> (if you >>>>>>>>>>>>> have your own code that does that, you can use it too, but you'd >>>>>>>>>>>>> have to >>>>>>>>>>>>> write your own Processor or Component). Iiuic, your scenario is >>>>>>>>>>>>> converting a >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2x in-only to a 1x in-out async mep. You should then treat your >>>>>>>>>>>>> exchange as >>>>>>>>>>>>> an async in-out and let your framework (Camel) decompose it and >>>>>>>>>>>>> compose it >>>>>>>>>>>>> back again. I would not keep threads blocked so I believe your >>>>>>>>>>>>> best bet is >>>>>>>>>>>>> using the Camel async messaging [2] and Futures (look at the >>>>>>>>>>>>> examples using >>>>>>>>>>>>> asyncSend* and asyncCallback*). The issue is that Camel is >>>>>>>>>>>>> stateless so >>>>>>>>>>>>> you'll need a correlationId, which you must have already and >>>>>>>>>>>>> something to >>>>>>>>>>>>> keep your state. A good bet would be jms [3], or you could write >>>>>>>>>>>>> your own. >>>>>>>>>>>>> If you used jms you would need to use both a correlationId and a >>>>>>>>>>>>> replyTo >>>>>>>>>>>>> queue. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from("jms:request-queue").to("netty:output?=correlationId"); >>>>>>>>>>>>> from("netty:input).to("jms:replyTo-queue") >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps a bit more information might be appropriate here. >>>>>>>>>>>> Eventually, >>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to "expose" this route via web services (using CXF of >>>>>>>>>>>> course). So, I would need to either block the request thread, >>>>>>>>>>>> waiting >>>>>>>>>>>> for a reply or perhaps check out the new Servlet 3.0 asynchronous >>>>>>>>>>>> processing stuff (I'm thinking this might help us get more done >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>> less http request threads) to do more of a continuation thing. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> We already have a correlation id. The "protocol" requires one and >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> server process just echos it back in the response message. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You may have to play a bit with the correlationId and if you >>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot use >>>>>>>>>>>>> the same you can do a second transformation/correlation using a >>>>>>>>>>>>> claim-check >>>>>>>>>>>>> sort of pattern. If you don't want to use jms you can implement >>>>>>>>>>>>> your own (in >>>>>>>>>>>>> memory) persistence and correlation. You can also use a >>>>>>>>>>>>> resequencer [4] if >>>>>>>>>>>>> you want to enforce the order. If you use asyncCallback, you get >>>>>>>>>>>>> the replies >>>>>>>>>>>>> when they become available, and you can control that. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think a resequencer is necessary. I don't want to >>>>>>>>>>>> guarantee >>>>>>>>>>>> the ordering. I'm mostly interested in throughput here. So, if a >>>>>>>>>>>> message comes in after another, but it can be processed faster, so >>>>>>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's an interesting scenario, I'll definitely give it more >>>>>>>>>>>>> thought, but I >>>>>>>>>>>>> hope this helps. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hadrian >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You have been very helpful. Thank you for taking the time! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Willem >>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> FuseSource >>>>>>>>>>> Web: http://www.fusesource.com >>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English) >>>>>>>>>>> http://jnn.javaeye.com (Chinese) >>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: willemjiang >>>>>>>>>>> Weibo: willemjiang >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >
