There is no bug on the seda consumer. He sends a InOnly message. So the consumer can only "handle" the exception itself by logging it.
If he does a InOut then the producer template will wait for the reply message, and because it failed with the exception, the reply message is the exception. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Bilgin Ibryam <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > can you try to set the exception on the exchange instead of throwing it? > If that's the case then I think there might a bug in SedaConsumer which > propagates back exceptions on the exchange but doesn't propagate thrown > exceptions. > > Bilgin > > > On 24 May 2013 12:31, dancerjohn <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I disagree... the javadoc for ProducerTemplate.sendBody() states "Notice: > > that if the processing of the exchange failed with an Exception it is > > thrown > > from this method as a CamelExecutionException with the caused exception > > wrapped.". So if an exception is thrown during processing sendBody should > > throw a CamelExecutionException. > > > > The point I am making is that when the channel is a direct channel this > > DOES > > happen. However, everything else being the same if the channel is a stub > > this DOES NOT happen. Therefore there is a difference in the components > > between direct and stub in this regard. This seems surprising. > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > > > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Why-doesn-t-the-stub-component-throw-exceptions-in-tests-tp5733041p5733083.html > > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- www.camelone.org: The open source integration conference. 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
