You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@servicemix.apache.org by William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> on 2006/04/12 22:33:27 UTC
Use of MessageExchange status
I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components. Most
of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods 'answer'
'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon completion of
the work done by the component.
Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior regarding
this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all, and
nothing seemed worse for wear.
I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
message, but this is not the case.
My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to receive
repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set to a
completed state?
Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate - thanks for
any help,
BJ
Disregard last message: Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com>.
Guillaume,
I updated my snapshot and this issue went away. I apologize for
wasting your time with it. On a high note, the listener strategy you
suggested is going to work perfectly :-)
Thanks again, you're a lifesaver!
BJ
On Apr 13, 2006, at 1:46 PM, William Blackburn wrote:
> I am using spring 1.2.6
>
> I can place the element "<cmsm:cMMsgExchangeListener />" outside
> the sm:container declaration and the bean instantiates as a
> 'regular' spring bean. Regardless of the method I use to declare
> the listeners within sm:container, I get:
>
> 2006-04-13 13:25:29,581 ERROR [ContextLoader] Context
> initialization failed
> org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Error
> creating bean with name 'jbi' defined in ServletContext resource [/
> WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml]: Error setting property values;
> nested exception is
> org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
> property 'listeners' of bean class
> [org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
> property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter
> method: Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type
> of the getter?
> org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
> property 'listeners' of bean class
> [org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
> property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter
> method: Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type
> of the getter?
> at
> org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValue
> (BeanWrapperImpl.java:567)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValue
> (BeanWrapperImpl.java:469)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValue
> (BeanWrapperImpl.java:626)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValues
> (BeanWrapperImpl.java:653)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValues
> (BeanWrapperImpl.java:642)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.factory.support.AbstractAutowireCapableBeanF
> actory.applyPropertyValues(AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFactory.java:
> 1023)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.factory.support.AbstractAutowireCapableBeanF
> actory.populateBean(AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFactory.java:824)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.factory.support.AbstractAutowireCapableBeanF
> actory.createBean(AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFactory.java:345)
>
> .... etc...
>
>
> It seems to be complaining about the mismatch in the types of
> getter and setter, the JBIContainer source looks like
>
> public Object[] getListeners(Class lc) {
> return listeners.getListeners(lc);
> }
>
> public void setListeners(EventListener[] listeners) {
> for (int i = 0; i < listeners.length; i++) {
> EventListener listener = listeners[i];
> addListener(listener);
> }
> }
>
> But if its been working that can't be it -- Maybe my bean isn't
> really an ExchangeListener? But the whole source of my bean is, is
> something wrong with my implementation??
>
> package com.clairmail.extensions.servicemix;
>
> import org.apache.servicemix.jbi.event.*;
> import org.apache.commons.logging.Log;
> import org.apache.commons.logging.LogFactory;
>
> import javax.jbi.messaging.MessageExchange;
> import javax.jbi.messaging.MessagingException;
> import javax.jbi.messaging.NormalizedMessage;
>
> /**
> * @org.apache.xbean.XBean
> */
> public class CMMsgExchangeListener implements ExchangeListener {
> private static final Log log = LogFactory.getLog
> (CMMsgExchangeListener.class);
>
> public CMMsgExchangeListener() {
> log.info("EXCHANGE LISTENER has been instantiated!");
> }
>
> public void exchangeSent(ExchangeEvent event) {
> MessageExchange ex = event.getExchange();
> log.info("EXCHANGE LISTENER: exchange sent to " +
> ex.getService().toString() + "; status is " + ex.getStatus());
> }
> }
>
> I'll keep noodling at it, but so far I'm pretty stumped.
>
> Thanks,
>
> BJ
>
>
>
> On Apr 13, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>
>> Spring uses the setListener method to set the listeners.
>> You could also try the standard spring configuration first
>>
>> <sm:container ...>
>> <property name="listeners">
>> <list>
>> <bean .../>
>> </list>
>> </property>
>>
>> It should also work.
>> I do not know why your xbean config does not work.
>> Do you use spring 1.2.6 ? Can you check that your bean is
>> succesfully created
>> if you put it ouside the <sm:container /> tag ?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>>
>>
>> On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>> First off, thank you for the help so far -- I have developed a
>>> prototypical listener, packaged it and its xbean data in a jar,
>>> placed the jar in servicemix' libs dir, and I am trying to configure
>>> it using something similar to the example you pointed me to:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> xmlns:cmsm="http://mobile.clairmail.com/config/1.0"
>>> ....
>>>
>>> <sm:listeners>
>>> <cmsm:cMMsgExchangeListener />
>>> </sm:listeners>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> But upon startup I get:
>>>
>>> Context initialization failed
>>> org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Error
>>> creating bean with name 'jbi' defined in ServletContext resource [/
>>> WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml]: Error setting property values;
>>> nested exception is
>>> org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
>>> property 'listeners' of bean class
>>> [org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
>>> property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter
>>> method:
>>> Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type of the
>>> getter?
>>>
>>> When I checked out the source, I see the 'setListeners' property
>>> actually takes an array -- I'm proabably being dumb, but I can't
>>> figure out the proper way to configure this.
>>>
>>> BJ
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>
>>>> You can use xbean annotations on your listener and this will
>>>> look like
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/trunk/
>>>> servicemix-jsr181/src/test/resources/org/apache/servicemix/jsr181/
>>>> spring.xml
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>
>>>> On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>> This is exactly what I'm looking for! I just had a look at
>>>>> JdbcAuditor and the ExchangeListener interface - I'm pretty sure
>>>>> writing the code will be straightforward, but I'm pretty new to
>>>>> servicemix - its clear how to install extensions of
>>>>> componentsupport
>>>>> using ActivationSpec in servicemix.xml -- but how would I install
>>>>> such a listener, once I wrote it?
>>>>>
>>>>> You've been a huge help, I really appreciate it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Currently, the only way to have a redelivery behavior in
>>>>>> ServiceMix
>>>>>> would be
>>>>>> to use a JCA flow that handles XA transactions (provided that
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> component rollback the transaction).
>>>>>> I think the mechanism you describe could be implemented in a
>>>>>> generic
>>>>>> way using a listener configured on the ServiceMix container.
>>>>>> Such a listener would be able to intercept exchanges with an
>>>>>> ERROR
>>>>>> status and put them in a redelivery queue. This would be a
>>>>>> ServiceMix
>>>>>> specific feature but completely transparent to the components
>>>>>> themselves. The only drawback if that the exchange would not
>>>>>> be the
>>>>>> same (but a copy). Some of the code in the JdbcAuditor may be
>>>>>> reused
>>>>>> for that (it's quite easy to resend a JBI exchange).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this make sense ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer
>>>>>>> and it
>>>>>>> blocked).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
>>>>>>> redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to
>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>> this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior
>>>>>>> myself,
>>>>>>> something like:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it
>>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>> successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the
>>>>>>> future
>>>>>>> * the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it)
>>>>>>> to a
>>>>>>> retry queue or similar
>>>>>>> * a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
>>>>>>> retry queue and resends the exchanges
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
>>>>>>> behavior.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BJ
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
>>>>>>>> The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> channel.sendSync(exchange)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the provider only receives the exchange without calling
>>>>>>>> done or
>>>>>>>> fail,
>>>>>>>> the consumer will be blocked forever ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
>>>>>>>> synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
>>>>>>>> NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
>>>>>>>> (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an
>>>>>>>> input
>>>>>>>> stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
>>>>>>>> memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the
>>>>>>>> stream
>>>>>>>> when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hope this helps,
>>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
>>>>>>>>> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo
>>>>>>>>> components.
>>>>>>>>> Most
>>>>>>>>> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods
>>>>>>>>> 'answer'
>>>>>>>>> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon
>>>>>>>>> completion of
>>>>>>>>> the work done by the component.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior
>>>>>>>>> regarding
>>>>>>>>> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all,
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> nothing seemed worse for wear.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
>>>>>>>>> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> message, but this is not the case.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
>>>>>>>>> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is
>>>>>>>>> there a
>>>>>>>>> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to
>>>>>>>>> receive
>>>>>>>>> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been
>>>>>>>>> set
>>>>>>>>> to a
>>>>>>>>> completed state?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate -
>>>>>>>>> thanks for
>>>>>>>>> any help,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BJ
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com>.
I am using spring 1.2.6
I can place the element "<cmsm:cMMsgExchangeListener />" outside the
sm:container declaration and the bean instantiates as a 'regular'
spring bean. Regardless of the method I use to declare the listeners
within sm:container, I get:
2006-04-13 13:25:29,581 ERROR [ContextLoader] Context initialization
failed
org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Error
creating bean with name 'jbi' defined in ServletContext resource [/
WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml]: Error setting property values;
nested exception is
org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
property 'listeners' of bean class
[org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter method:
Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type of the
getter?
org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
property 'listeners' of bean class
[org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter method:
Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type of the
getter?
at org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValue
(BeanWrapperImpl.java:567)
at org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValue
(BeanWrapperImpl.java:469)
at org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValue
(BeanWrapperImpl.java:626)
at
org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValues
(BeanWrapperImpl.java:653)
at
org.springframework.beans.BeanWrapperImpl.setPropertyValues
(BeanWrapperImpl.java:642)
at
org.springframework.beans.factory.support.AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFac
tory.applyPropertyValues(AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFactory.java:1023)
at
org.springframework.beans.factory.support.AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFac
tory.populateBean(AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFactory.java:824)
at
org.springframework.beans.factory.support.AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFac
tory.createBean(AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFactory.java:345)
.... etc...
It seems to be complaining about the mismatch in the types of getter
and setter, the JBIContainer source looks like
public Object[] getListeners(Class lc) {
return listeners.getListeners(lc);
}
public void setListeners(EventListener[] listeners) {
for (int i = 0; i < listeners.length; i++) {
EventListener listener = listeners[i];
addListener(listener);
}
}
But if its been working that can't be it -- Maybe my bean isn't
really an ExchangeListener? But the whole source of my bean is, is
something wrong with my implementation??
package com.clairmail.extensions.servicemix;
import org.apache.servicemix.jbi.event.*;
import org.apache.commons.logging.Log;
import org.apache.commons.logging.LogFactory;
import javax.jbi.messaging.MessageExchange;
import javax.jbi.messaging.MessagingException;
import javax.jbi.messaging.NormalizedMessage;
/**
* @org.apache.xbean.XBean
*/
public class CMMsgExchangeListener implements ExchangeListener {
private static final Log log = LogFactory.getLog
(CMMsgExchangeListener.class);
public CMMsgExchangeListener() {
log.info("EXCHANGE LISTENER has been instantiated!");
}
public void exchangeSent(ExchangeEvent event) {
MessageExchange ex = event.getExchange();
log.info("EXCHANGE LISTENER: exchange sent to " +
ex.getService().toString() + "; status is " + ex.getStatus());
}
}
I'll keep noodling at it, but so far I'm pretty stumped.
Thanks,
BJ
On Apr 13, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Spring uses the setListener method to set the listeners.
> You could also try the standard spring configuration first
>
> <sm:container ...>
> <property name="listeners">
> <list>
> <bean .../>
> </list>
> </property>
>
> It should also work.
> I do not know why your xbean config does not work.
> Do you use spring 1.2.6 ? Can you check that your bean is
> succesfully created
> if you put it ouside the <sm:container /> tag ?
>
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
>
>
> On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>> First off, thank you for the help so far -- I have developed a
>> prototypical listener, packaged it and its xbean data in a jar,
>> placed the jar in servicemix' libs dir, and I am trying to configure
>> it using something similar to the example you pointed me to:
>>
>> ...
>> xmlns:cmsm="http://mobile.clairmail.com/config/1.0"
>> ....
>>
>> <sm:listeners>
>> <cmsm:cMMsgExchangeListener />
>> </sm:listeners>
>>
>> ...
>>
>> But upon startup I get:
>>
>> Context initialization failed
>> org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Error
>> creating bean with name 'jbi' defined in ServletContext resource [/
>> WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml]: Error setting property values;
>> nested exception is
>> org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
>> property 'listeners' of bean class
>> [org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
>> property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter method:
>> Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type of the
>> getter?
>>
>> When I checked out the source, I see the 'setListeners' property
>> actually takes an array -- I'm proabably being dumb, but I can't
>> figure out the proper way to configure this.
>>
>> BJ
>>
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>>> You can use xbean annotations on your listener and this will look
>>> like
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/trunk/
>>> servicemix-jsr181/src/test/resources/org/apache/servicemix/jsr181/
>>> spring.xml
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>
>>> On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>> This is exactly what I'm looking for! I just had a look at
>>>> JdbcAuditor and the ExchangeListener interface - I'm pretty sure
>>>> writing the code will be straightforward, but I'm pretty new to
>>>> servicemix - its clear how to install extensions of
>>>> componentsupport
>>>> using ActivationSpec in servicemix.xml -- but how would I install
>>>> such a listener, once I wrote it?
>>>>
>>>> You've been a huge help, I really appreciate it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Currently, the only way to have a redelivery behavior in
>>>>> ServiceMix
>>>>> would be
>>>>> to use a JCA flow that handles XA transactions (provided that your
>>>>> component rollback the transaction).
>>>>> I think the mechanism you describe could be implemented in a
>>>>> generic
>>>>> way using a listener configured on the ServiceMix container.
>>>>> Such a listener would be able to intercept exchanges with an ERROR
>>>>> status and put them in a redelivery queue. This would be a
>>>>> ServiceMix
>>>>> specific feature but completely transparent to the components
>>>>> themselves. The only drawback if that the exchange would not
>>>>> be the
>>>>> same (but a copy). Some of the code in the JdbcAuditor may be
>>>>> reused
>>>>> for that (it's quite easy to resend a JBI exchange).
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this make sense ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer
>>>>>> and it
>>>>>> blocked).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
>>>>>> redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to
>>>>>> address
>>>>>> this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior
>>>>>> myself,
>>>>>> something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it
>>>>>> can't
>>>>>> successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the
>>>>>> future
>>>>>> * the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it)
>>>>>> to a
>>>>>> retry queue or similar
>>>>>> * a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
>>>>>> retry queue and resends the exchanges
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
>>>>>> behavior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BJ
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
>>>>>>> The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> channel.sendSync(exchange)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the provider only receives the exchange without calling
>>>>>>> done or
>>>>>>> fail,
>>>>>>> the consumer will be blocked forever ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
>>>>>>> synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
>>>>>>> NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
>>>>>>> (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an
>>>>>>> input
>>>>>>> stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
>>>>>>> memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the
>>>>>>> stream
>>>>>>> when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hope this helps,
>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
>>>>>>>> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo
>>>>>>>> components.
>>>>>>>> Most
>>>>>>>> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods
>>>>>>>> 'answer'
>>>>>>>> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon
>>>>>>>> completion of
>>>>>>>> the work done by the component.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior
>>>>>>>> regarding
>>>>>>>> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all,
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> nothing seemed worse for wear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
>>>>>>>> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
>>>>>>>> message, but this is not the case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
>>>>>>>> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
>>>>>>>> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to
>>>>>>>> receive
>>>>>>>> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set
>>>>>>>> to a
>>>>>>>> completed state?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate -
>>>>>>>> thanks for
>>>>>>>> any help,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BJ
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Spring uses the setListener method to set the listeners.
You could also try the standard spring configuration first
<sm:container ...>
<property name="listeners">
<list>
<bean .../>
</list>
</property>
It should also work.
I do not know why your xbean config does not work.
Do you use spring 1.2.6 ? Can you check that your bean is succesfully created
if you put it ouside the <sm:container /> tag ?
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> First off, thank you for the help so far -- I have developed a
> prototypical listener, packaged it and its xbean data in a jar,
> placed the jar in servicemix' libs dir, and I am trying to configure
> it using something similar to the example you pointed me to:
>
> ...
> xmlns:cmsm="http://mobile.clairmail.com/config/1.0"
> ....
>
> <sm:listeners>
> <cmsm:cMMsgExchangeListener />
> </sm:listeners>
>
> ...
>
> But upon startup I get:
>
> Context initialization failed
> org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Error
> creating bean with name 'jbi' defined in ServletContext resource [/
> WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml]: Error setting property values;
> nested exception is
> org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
> property 'listeners' of bean class
> [org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
> property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter method:
> Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type of the
> getter?
>
> When I checked out the source, I see the 'setListeners' property
> actually takes an array -- I'm proabably being dumb, but I can't
> figure out the proper way to configure this.
>
> BJ
>
>
> On Apr 12, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>
> > You can use xbean annotations on your listener and this will look like
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/trunk/
> > servicemix-jsr181/src/test/resources/org/apache/servicemix/jsr181/
> > spring.xml
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> > On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> This is exactly what I'm looking for! I just had a look at
> >> JdbcAuditor and the ExchangeListener interface - I'm pretty sure
> >> writing the code will be straightforward, but I'm pretty new to
> >> servicemix - its clear how to install extensions of componentsupport
> >> using ActivationSpec in servicemix.xml -- but how would I install
> >> such a listener, once I wrote it?
> >>
> >> You've been a huge help, I really appreciate it.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> >>
> >>> Currently, the only way to have a redelivery behavior in ServiceMix
> >>> would be
> >>> to use a JCA flow that handles XA transactions (provided that your
> >>> component rollback the transaction).
> >>> I think the mechanism you describe could be implemented in a generic
> >>> way using a listener configured on the ServiceMix container.
> >>> Such a listener would be able to intercept exchanges with an ERROR
> >>> status and put them in a redelivery queue. This would be a
> >>> ServiceMix
> >>> specific feature but completely transparent to the components
> >>> themselves. The only drawback if that the exchange would not be the
> >>> same (but a copy). Some of the code in the JdbcAuditor may be
> >>> reused
> >>> for that (it's quite easy to resend a JBI exchange).
> >>>
> >>> Does this make sense ?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>>
> >>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> >>>> Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in
> >>>> the
> >>>> httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer and it
> >>>> blocked).
> >>>>
> >>>> But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
> >>>> redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to address
> >>>> this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior
> >>>> myself,
> >>>> something like:
> >>>>
> >>>> * the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it
> >>>> can't
> >>>> successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the
> >>>> future
> >>>> * the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it) to a
> >>>> retry queue or similar
> >>>> * a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
> >>>> retry queue and resends the exchanges
> >>>>
> >>>> But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
> >>>> behavior.
> >>>>
> >>>> BJ
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
> >>>>> The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> channel.sendSync(exchange)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If the provider only receives the exchange without calling done or
> >>>>> fail,
> >>>>> the consumer will be blocked forever ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
> >>>>> synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
> >>>>> NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
> >>>>> (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an input
> >>>>> stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
> >>>>> memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the
> >>>>> stream
> >>>>> when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hope this helps,
> >>>>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
> >>>>>> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components.
> >>>>>> Most
> >>>>>> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods
> >>>>>> 'answer'
> >>>>>> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon
> >>>>>> completion of
> >>>>>> the work done by the component.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior
> >>>>>> regarding
> >>>>>> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all,
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> nothing seemed worse for wear.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
> >>>>>> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
> >>>>>> message, but this is not the case.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
> >>>>>> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
> >>>>>> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to
> >>>>>> receive
> >>>>>> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set
> >>>>>> to a
> >>>>>> completed state?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate -
> >>>>>> thanks for
> >>>>>> any help,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> BJ
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com>.
First off, thank you for the help so far -- I have developed a
prototypical listener, packaged it and its xbean data in a jar,
placed the jar in servicemix' libs dir, and I am trying to configure
it using something similar to the example you pointed me to:
...
xmlns:cmsm="http://mobile.clairmail.com/config/1.0"
....
<sm:listeners>
<cmsm:cMMsgExchangeListener />
</sm:listeners>
...
But upon startup I get:
Context initialization failed
org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Error
creating bean with name 'jbi' defined in ServletContext resource [/
WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml]: Error setting property values;
nested exception is
org.springframework.beans.NotWritablePropertyException: Invalid
property 'listeners' of bean class
[org.apache.servicemix.jbi.container.SpringJBIContainer]: Bean
property 'listeners' is not writable or has an invalid setter method:
Does the parameter type of the setter match the return type of the
getter?
When I checked out the source, I see the 'setListeners' property
actually takes an array -- I'm proabably being dumb, but I can't
figure out the proper way to configure this.
BJ
On Apr 12, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> You can use xbean annotations on your listener and this will look like
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/trunk/
> servicemix-jsr181/src/test/resources/org/apache/servicemix/jsr181/
> spring.xml
>
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
>
> On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>> This is exactly what I'm looking for! I just had a look at
>> JdbcAuditor and the ExchangeListener interface - I'm pretty sure
>> writing the code will be straightforward, but I'm pretty new to
>> servicemix - its clear how to install extensions of componentsupport
>> using ActivationSpec in servicemix.xml -- but how would I install
>> such a listener, once I wrote it?
>>
>> You've been a huge help, I really appreciate it.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>>> Currently, the only way to have a redelivery behavior in ServiceMix
>>> would be
>>> to use a JCA flow that handles XA transactions (provided that your
>>> component rollback the transaction).
>>> I think the mechanism you describe could be implemented in a generic
>>> way using a listener configured on the ServiceMix container.
>>> Such a listener would be able to intercept exchanges with an ERROR
>>> status and put them in a redelivery queue. This would be a
>>> ServiceMix
>>> specific feature but completely transparent to the components
>>> themselves. The only drawback if that the exchange would not be the
>>> same (but a copy). Some of the code in the JdbcAuditor may be
>>> reused
>>> for that (it's quite easy to resend a JBI exchange).
>>>
>>> Does this make sense ?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>
>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>> Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in
>>>> the
>>>> httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer and it
>>>> blocked).
>>>>
>>>> But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
>>>> redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to address
>>>> this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior
>>>> myself,
>>>> something like:
>>>>
>>>> * the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it
>>>> can't
>>>> successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the
>>>> future
>>>> * the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it) to a
>>>> retry queue or similar
>>>> * a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
>>>> retry queue and resends the exchanges
>>>>
>>>> But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
>>>> behavior.
>>>>
>>>> BJ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
>>>>> The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
>>>>>
>>>>> channel.sendSync(exchange)
>>>>>
>>>>> If the provider only receives the exchange without calling done or
>>>>> fail,
>>>>> the consumer will be blocked forever ...
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
>>>>> synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
>>>>> NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
>>>>> (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an input
>>>>> stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
>>>>> memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the
>>>>> stream
>>>>> when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope this helps,
>>>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
>>>>>> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components.
>>>>>> Most
>>>>>> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods
>>>>>> 'answer'
>>>>>> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon
>>>>>> completion of
>>>>>> the work done by the component.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior
>>>>>> regarding
>>>>>> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> nothing seemed worse for wear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
>>>>>> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
>>>>>> message, but this is not the case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
>>>>>> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
>>>>>> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to
>>>>>> receive
>>>>>> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set
>>>>>> to a
>>>>>> completed state?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate -
>>>>>> thanks for
>>>>>> any help,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BJ
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
You can use xbean annotations on your listener and this will look like
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/servicemix/trunk/servicemix-jsr181/src/test/resources/org/apache/servicemix/jsr181/spring.xml
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
On 4/13/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> This is exactly what I'm looking for! I just had a look at
> JdbcAuditor and the ExchangeListener interface - I'm pretty sure
> writing the code will be straightforward, but I'm pretty new to
> servicemix - its clear how to install extensions of componentsupport
> using ActivationSpec in servicemix.xml -- but how would I install
> such a listener, once I wrote it?
>
> You've been a huge help, I really appreciate it.
>
>
>
> On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>
> > Currently, the only way to have a redelivery behavior in ServiceMix
> > would be
> > to use a JCA flow that handles XA transactions (provided that your
> > component rollback the transaction).
> > I think the mechanism you describe could be implemented in a generic
> > way using a listener configured on the ServiceMix container.
> > Such a listener would be able to intercept exchanges with an ERROR
> > status and put them in a redelivery queue. This would be a ServiceMix
> > specific feature but completely transparent to the components
> > themselves. The only drawback if that the exchange would not be the
> > same (but a copy). Some of the code in the JdbcAuditor may be reused
> > for that (it's quite easy to resend a JBI exchange).
> >
> > Does this make sense ?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> > On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in the
> >> httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer and it
> >> blocked).
> >>
> >> But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
> >> redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to address
> >> this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior myself,
> >> something like:
> >>
> >> * the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it can't
> >> successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the
> >> future
> >> * the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it) to a
> >> retry queue or similar
> >> * a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
> >> retry queue and resends the exchanges
> >>
> >> But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
> >> behavior.
> >>
> >> BJ
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> >>
> >>> Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
> >>> The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
> >>>
> >>> channel.sendSync(exchange)
> >>>
> >>> If the provider only receives the exchange without calling done or
> >>> fail,
> >>> the consumer will be blocked forever ...
> >>>
> >>> One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
> >>> synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
> >>> NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
> >>> (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an input
> >>> stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
> >>> memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the stream
> >>> when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
> >>>
> >>> Hope this helps,
> >>> Guillaume Nodet
> >>>
> >>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> >>>> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
> >>>> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components.
> >>>> Most
> >>>> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods
> >>>> 'answer'
> >>>> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon
> >>>> completion of
> >>>> the work done by the component.
> >>>>
> >>>> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior
> >>>> regarding
> >>>> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all, and
> >>>> nothing seemed worse for wear.
> >>>>
> >>>> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
> >>>> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
> >>>> message, but this is not the case.
> >>>>
> >>>> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
> >>>> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
> >>>> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to receive
> >>>> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set
> >>>> to a
> >>>> completed state?
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate -
> >>>> thanks for
> >>>> any help,
> >>>>
> >>>> BJ
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com>.
This is exactly what I'm looking for! I just had a look at
JdbcAuditor and the ExchangeListener interface - I'm pretty sure
writing the code will be straightforward, but I'm pretty new to
servicemix - its clear how to install extensions of componentsupport
using ActivationSpec in servicemix.xml -- but how would I install
such a listener, once I wrote it?
You've been a huge help, I really appreciate it.
On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Currently, the only way to have a redelivery behavior in ServiceMix
> would be
> to use a JCA flow that handles XA transactions (provided that your
> component rollback the transaction).
> I think the mechanism you describe could be implemented in a generic
> way using a listener configured on the ServiceMix container.
> Such a listener would be able to intercept exchanges with an ERROR
> status and put them in a redelivery queue. This would be a ServiceMix
> specific feature but completely transparent to the components
> themselves. The only drawback if that the exchange would not be the
> same (but a copy). Some of the code in the JdbcAuditor may be reused
> for that (it's quite easy to resend a JBI exchange).
>
> Does this make sense ?
>
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
>
> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>> Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in the
>> httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer and it
>> blocked).
>>
>> But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
>> redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to address
>> this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior myself,
>> something like:
>>
>> * the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it can't
>> successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the
>> future
>> * the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it) to a
>> retry queue or similar
>> * a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
>> retry queue and resends the exchanges
>>
>> But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
>> behavior.
>>
>> BJ
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>>> Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
>>> The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
>>>
>>> channel.sendSync(exchange)
>>>
>>> If the provider only receives the exchange without calling done or
>>> fail,
>>> the consumer will be blocked forever ...
>>>
>>> One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
>>> synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
>>> NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
>>> (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an input
>>> stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
>>> memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the stream
>>> when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
>>>
>>> Hope this helps,
>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>>
>>> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
>>>> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components.
>>>> Most
>>>> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods
>>>> 'answer'
>>>> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon
>>>> completion of
>>>> the work done by the component.
>>>>
>>>> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior
>>>> regarding
>>>> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all, and
>>>> nothing seemed worse for wear.
>>>>
>>>> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
>>>> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
>>>> message, but this is not the case.
>>>>
>>>> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
>>>> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
>>>> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to receive
>>>> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set
>>>> to a
>>>> completed state?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate -
>>>> thanks for
>>>> any help,
>>>>
>>>> BJ
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Currently, the only way to have a redelivery behavior in ServiceMix would be
to use a JCA flow that handles XA transactions (provided that your
component rollback the transaction).
I think the mechanism you describe could be implemented in a generic
way using a listener configured on the ServiceMix container.
Such a listener would be able to intercept exchanges with an ERROR
status and put them in a redelivery queue. This would be a ServiceMix
specific feature but completely transparent to the components
themselves. The only drawback if that the exchange would not be the
same (but a copy). Some of the code in the JdbcAuditor may be reused
for that (it's quite easy to resend a JBI exchange).
Does this make sense ?
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in the
> httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer and it
> blocked).
>
> But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
> redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to address
> this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior myself,
> something like:
>
> * the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it can't
> successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the future
> * the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it) to a
> retry queue or similar
> * a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
> retry queue and resends the exchanges
>
> But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
> behavior.
>
> BJ
>
>
>
> On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>
> > Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
> > The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
> >
> > channel.sendSync(exchange)
> >
> > If the provider only receives the exchange without calling done or
> > fail,
> > the consumer will be blocked forever ...
> >
> > One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
> > synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
> > NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
> > (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an input
> > stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
> > memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the stream
> > when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> > On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
> >> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components. Most
> >> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods 'answer'
> >> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon completion of
> >> the work done by the component.
> >>
> >> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior regarding
> >> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all, and
> >> nothing seemed worse for wear.
> >>
> >> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
> >> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
> >> message, but this is not the case.
> >>
> >> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
> >> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
> >> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to receive
> >> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set to a
> >> completed state?
> >>
> >> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate - thanks for
> >> any help,
> >>
> >> BJ
> >>
>
>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com>.
Thank you - this makes sense, in fact I've seen this behavior in the
httpbinding component (initially I wasn't sending an answer and it
blocked).
But does this mean that I should go ahead and implement my own
redelivery mechanism to address my other concern? I want to address
this scenario, but in an async way - I can code the behavior myself,
something like:
* the provider might receive the exchange and determine that it can't
successfully complete it now, but that it may be able to in the future
* the provider sends the exchange (or a representation of it) to a
retry queue or similar
* a Quartz task or similar component periodically pulls from the
retry queue and resends the exchanges
But I don't want to write all this if servicemix itself has this
behavior.
BJ
On Apr 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
> The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
>
> channel.sendSync(exchange)
>
> If the provider only receives the exchange without calling done or
> fail,
> the consumer will be blocked forever ...
>
> One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
> synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
> NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
> (Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an input
> stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
> memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the stream
> when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
>
> Hope this helps,
> Guillaume Nodet
>
> On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
>> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
>> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components. Most
>> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods 'answer'
>> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon completion of
>> the work done by the component.
>>
>> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior regarding
>> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all, and
>> nothing seemed worse for wear.
>>
>> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
>> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
>> message, but this is not the case.
>>
>> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
>> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
>> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to receive
>> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set to a
>> completed state?
>>
>> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate - thanks for
>> any help,
>>
>> BJ
>>
Re: Use of MessageExchange status
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Let's take a simple example with an In-Only pattern.
The consumer will create an exchange and send it synchronously:
channel.sendSync(exchange)
If the provider only receives the exchange without calling done or fail,
the consumer will be blocked forever ...
One of the reason why the consumer could send the message
synchronously is when the JAXP source set as the content of the
NormalizedMessage is a stream based source.
(Imagine the case of a file poller which would only send an input
stream opened on the file instead of reading the whole file in
memory). In such a case, the consumer will want to close the stream
when the provider as returned a status (DONE or ERROR).
Hope this helps,
Guillaume Nodet
On 4/12/06, William Blackburn <wj...@mac.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out the use of the 'status' property of
> MessageExchange especially regarding servicemix Pojo components. Most
> of the examples I've seen show using the convenience methods 'answer'
> 'done' and 'fail' to set this status appropriately upon completion of
> the work done by the component.
>
> Practically speaking, I cannot see differences in behavior regarding
> this status. Indeed in my early testing I never set it at all, and
> nothing seemed worse for wear.
>
> I was hoping to discover that failing to set this status to a
> completed state would result in further attempts to deliver the
> message, but this is not the case.
>
> My question is, what do these states signify, and which of
> servicemix' internals is using the status? Secondly, is there a
> configuration of servicemix that would allow a component to receive
> repeated delivery attempts of an exchange that has not been set to a
> completed state?
>
> Sorry to keep harping on this subject, but I'm desperate - thanks for
> any help,
>
> BJ
>