If performance is the most important requirement, I would go for camel-netty, camel-mina2 or camel-mina.
One remark: I really ofter hear "as fast as possible" but in most cases, it doesn't matter whether it takes 10ms or 50ms longer for one request. If this is the same for your requirement, have a look at some other protocols you may are more familiar with, e.g.: camel-http(4), camel-cxf (for JAX-RS or JAX-WS), ... But in all this cases, your applications/services are not so loosely couplet (as possible). If Camel1 and/or Camel2 is down, AppCamel1 and/or AppCamel2 will recognize it. This is not the case with a message broker in between. What's your strategy if you have to scale CamelX? Adding Camel3, Camel4, ...and so on, I asume. But in this case, you have to touch AppCamel1 and AppCamel2 again. With an message broker, simple add more consumers onCamel1 and Camel2 . And if this is not enough, add Camel3 and Camel4. But in this case, you don't have to touch AppCamel1 or AppCamel2. Best, Christian On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:04 PM, unludo <unl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your answer. > > I'd like to have a response as fast as possible and can afford loosing > messages. > > Actually I would like to see if I can avoid activemq in the middle. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/scalable-bus-with-multiple-Camel-instances-tp5606593p5607615.html > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
