On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you think I should create a JIRA concerning the camel-saxon feature not > working on a pure Karaf? >
Yeah it could be a matter of adding the xmlresolver to the camel-saxon feature as a dependency. Then it may install on a pure karaf. Feel free to work on a patch and log a JIRA. > /Bengt > > > 2012/11/16 Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> > >> OK, if that's the case then I'm "already there" since I use Saxon for >> xpath as well. >> >> Thanks, >> >> /Bengt >> >> >> 2012/11/16 Claus Ibsen <[email protected]> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Bengt Rodehav <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Hello Christian. >>> > >>> > Thanks for your remarks. However, I did try using the camel-saxon >>> feature >>> > (first thing I did) but it doesn't work when running under pure Karaf. >>> It >>> > probably works under ServiceMix (haven't tested that) but I have my own >>> > custom Karaf+Camel distribution. >>> > >>> > I'm not 100% sure what is wrong but first of all an XmlResolver is >>> needed >>> > which is why I need to install >>> org.apache.servicemix.bundles.xmlresolver. >>> > It seems like the camel-saxon features assumes that this is present. I >>> > think this bundle should be added to the camel-saxon feature since the >>> > feature shouldn't assume that you are running in ServiceMix. It should >>> only >>> > assume a standard Karaf. >>> > >>> > Also, I can't get it to work with version 9.3.0.11_2 >>> > of org.apache.servicemix.bundles.saxon due to "No XPathFctory >>> > implementation found for the object model: >>> http://saxon.sf.net/jaxp/xpath/om";. >>> > If I change to version 9.4.0.4_1 it works. >>> > >>> > Perhaps the Camel feature descriptors are not adapted for Karaf 2.3.0? >>> Or >>> > they are not tested in pure Karaf but only in ServiceMix (this is what I >>> > think). >>> > >>> > Regarding xquery vs xpath that's very interesting. My use case doesn't >>> need >>> > anything more advanced than xpath and I (falsely?) assumed that the >>> least >>> > advanced (xpath) would give me the best performance. It seems very >>> > illogical that the more advanced xquery would perform better. I will try >>> > your suggestion though. >>> > >>> >>> I doubt that too, its just that xquery is implemented by Saxon. And >>> Saxon is faster than what comes default from the JDK. So when people >>> switch to xquery the get the faster Saxon. >>> >>> >>> > Thanks, >>> > >>> > /Bengt >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > 2012/11/15 Christian Müller <[email protected]> >>> > >>> >> Hi Bengt! >>> >> >>> >> Two remarks: >>> >> You can leverage on the camel-saxon feature [1] to manage all the >>> >> dependencies saxon need. >>> >> And you could try using xquery instead of xpath [2]. It should be >>> faster. >>> >> >>> >> [1] >>> >> >>> >> >>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/trunk/platforms/karaf/features/src/main/resources/features.xml >>> >> [2] >>> >> >>> >> >>> https://github.com/muellerc/esbperformance/blob/esbperformance-1.1.x/servicemix-osgi/cbr/src/main/resources/META-INF/spring/bundle-context.xml >>> >> >>> >> Best, >>> >> Christian >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Claus Ibsen >>> ----------------- >>> Red Hat, Inc. >>> FuseSource is now part of Red Hat >>> Email: [email protected] >>> Web: http://fusesource.com >>> Twitter: davsclaus >>> Blog: http://davsclaus.com >>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen >>> >> >> -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- Red Hat, Inc. FuseSource is now part of Red Hat Email: [email protected] Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus Blog: http://davsclaus.com Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
