> Isn't it difficult to do proper error handling with the EIP > based approach? I wouldn't think so. In fact it's probably easier than writing lots of specific error handling code. I'm using Invalid Message Channel (IMS) to handle some errors. Anything that fails goes in the IMC via a route that uses various camel processors to notify/log/persist etc. So the message handler that throws the error doesn't need to do anything other than throw the error - by sending the message to an error topic. It's routed from there to the IMC after a certain number of retries:
http://codebrane.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/20111125-082741.jpg Alistair -------------- mov eax,1 mov ebx,0 int 80 On 25 Nov 2011, at 08:34, diwakar wrote: > Hi, > > Very basic doubt. > Isn't it difficult to do proper error handling with the EIP > based approach? > It is much simpler with Pojo interfaces. > Could Camel have been a bunch of libraries? (Except for asynch > support). With pure Java for controling the flow. > Please let me know your comment. > > With Best Regards, > Diwakar > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Error-handling-Camel-or-EIP-vs-Pojo-tp5022204p5022204.html > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
