Why would wire taps be dependent on order? I think you may be trying to use
wiretap for the wrong use case. Wiretaps make a copy of the exchange and
then send that asynchronously to the endpoint. They are used for listening
in on exchanges not ordered firing.

*Robert Simmons Jr. MSc. - Lead Java Architect @ EA*
*Author of: Hardcore Java (2003) and Maintainable Java (2012)*
*LinkedIn: **http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-simmons/40/852/a39
<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-simmons/40/852/a39>*


On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Happy User <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Thank you..
>
> On Friday, May 30, 2014, Mark Frazier <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Short answer to 1) yes.
> >
> > Assuming I’m understanding you correctly, if your first route is an inOut
> > exchange, then the response from
> > webserviceURI will be sent back, it will be done independently of the
> > exchange being sent to the second route.
> >
> > The second route will be executed in a separate thread, and that exchange
> > will be inOnly.
> >
> > Ie, they will run in parallel .
> >
> > http://camel.apache.org/wire-tap.html
> >
> > On May 29, 2014, at 8:00 PM, Happy User <[email protected]
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > > Example scenario - External caller calls the blueprint and bp has 2
> > routes.
> > >
> > > <route1>
> > > <from uri="triggerURI"/>
> > > <to uri="webserviceURI"/>
> > > <wiretap uri="direct:secondRoute"/>
> > > </route1>
> > >
> > > <route2>
> > > <from uri="direct:secondRoute"/>
> > > <log message="Second Route"/>
> > > </route2>
> > >
> > > QNS:
> > >
> > > 1. wiretap send a response(came from the webserviceURI) to external
> > caller
> > > back and call the second route as well - Is my understanding correct?
> > > 2. if yes, will we be able to enforce a condition that wiretap should
> > send
> > > response to external caller first and then should proceed with second
> > > route?. If that enforcement is not achievable by wiretap, which pattern
> > > should i use to return response to caller as we as proceed with the
> next
> > > route?
> > >
> > > -Thanks
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to