You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@camel.apache.org by ext2 <xu...@tongtech.com> on 2010/04/22 09:37:43 UTC
答复: Is this a bug of try-catch or transaction?
Thanks Claus Ibsen:
If we just consider this example, move policy before doTry could resolve it; but If we consider another situation:
<doTry>
..some other operation ..
<policy ref="...>
transaction operations
</policy>
<docatch>
</docatch>
</dotry>
At this time, I cannot move policy to <doTry/> easily; and also, if transaction operations raise exception, the doCatch cannot catch it;
Claus Ibsen wrote:
>Move the <policy> before the <doTry>
>On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM, ext2 <xu...@tongtech.com> wrote:
>
> Hi:
>
> The camel's transaction required the transacted-error-handler, but try-catch
> required no-error-handler. They will conflict; following is a sample that
> the try-catch cannot works while using transaction. but I am not sure if
> this is bug or just a camel's limit?
>
> For example, the following route :
>
> <doTry>
> <policy ref="PROPAGATION_REQUIRED">
> <pipeline>
> <to uri="ibatis:table.add?statementType=Insert"/>
> <bean ref="errorbean" method="raiseError"/>
> </pipeline>
> </policy>
> <doCatch>
> <exception>java.lang.Exception</exception>
> <bean ref="mybean" method="foo"/>
> </doCatch>
>
> As for normal understanding: the errorbean(just after ibatis) raise error,
> so the pipeline will marked as rollback status, but the exception is still
> exist, and the catch clause will be execute.And in camel, doCatch cannot be
> execute;
>
>
>
--
Claus Ibsen
Apache Camel Committer
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
Re: Can I configure sync or asynchronous for individual processor
in spring?
Posted by Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com>.
There is a sync option which you can use the let the component to be
sync or async.
For the processor, if it does not implement AsyncProcessor interface, it
will be ran synchronously.
You can find more information the component which support the async
option here[1].
[1]http://camel.apache.org/asynchronous-routing-engine.html
From Camel 2.4.0, we did some work to make the camel asyn
On 10/13/10 12:45 PM, ext2 wrote:
> Can I configure sync or asynchronous for individual processor in spring?
> If so , I could separate the CPU-cost actions and IO-Cost actions in
> different thread more clearly;
>
>
>
>
--
Willem
----------------------------------
Open Source Integration: http://www.fusesource.com
Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
http://jnn.javaeye.com (Chinese)
Twitter: http://twitter.com/willemjiang
Can I configure sync or asynchronous for individual processor in spring?
Posted by ext2 <xu...@tongtech.com>.
Can I configure sync or asynchronous for individual processor in spring?
If so , I could separate the CPU-cost actions and IO-Cost actions in
different thread more clearly;
Re: Is this a bug of try-catch or transaction?
Posted by ext2 <xu...@tongtech.com>.
Thanks willem:
It seems that the onException has a little different difference to
try-catch;
That's :
try-catch could recover the exception and continue to execute next processor
in pipeline
But on-Exception always stop execute when exception occurs in pipeline
I am not very sure about this(But according the camel 2.2's source code ,it
does so, and I have tried a simple sample to prove this); if it does only
works as such means, the onException cannot replace try-catch completely;
Willem wrote:
>How about using the onExeption[1] ?
>It works within the ErrorHandler, and it can do the same thing as
>doTry... doCatch does.
[1]http://camel.apache.org/exception-clause.html
Willem
ext2 wrote:
> Thanks Claus Ibsen:
>
> If we just consider this example, move policy before doTry could resolve
it; but If we consider another situation:
> <doTry>
> ..some other operation ..
> <policy ref="...>
> transaction operations
> </policy>
> <docatch>
> </docatch>
> </dotry>
>
> At this time, I cannot move policy to <doTry/> easily; and also, if
transaction operations raise exception, the doCatch cannot catch it;
>
>
> Claus Ibsen wrote:
>> Move the <policy> before the <doTry>
>
>
>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM, ext2 <xu...@tongtech.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi:
>>
>> The camel's transaction required the transacted-error-handler, but
try-catch
>> required no-error-handler. They will conflict; following is a sample that
>> the try-catch cannot works while using transaction. but I am not sure if
>> this is bug or just a camel's limit?
>>
>> For example, the following route :
>>
>> <doTry>
>> <policy ref="PROPAGATION_REQUIRED">
>> <pipeline>
>> <to uri="ibatis:table.add?statementType=Insert"/>
>> <bean ref="errorbean" method="raiseError"/>
>> </pipeline>
>> </policy>
>> <doCatch>
>> <exception>java.lang.Exception</exception>
>> <bean ref="mybean" method="foo"/>
>> </doCatch>
>>
>> As for normal understanding: the errorbean(just after ibatis) raise
error,
>> so the pipeline will marked as rollback status, but the exception is
still
>> exist, and the catch clause will be execute.And in camel, doCatch cannot
be
>> execute;
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: 答复: Is this a bug of try-catch or transaction?
Posted by Willem Jiang <wi...@gmail.com>.
How about using the onExeption[1] ?
It works within the ErrorHandler, and it can do the same thing as
doTry... doCatch does.
[1]http://camel.apache.org/exception-clause.html
Willem
ext2 wrote:
> Thanks Claus Ibsen:
>
> If we just consider this example, move policy before doTry could resolve it; but If we consider another situation:
> <doTry>
> ..some other operation ..
> <policy ref="...>
> transaction operations
> </policy>
> <docatch>
> </docatch>
> </dotry>
>
> At this time, I cannot move policy to <doTry/> easily; and also, if transaction operations raise exception, the doCatch cannot catch it;
>
>
> Claus Ibsen wrote:
>> Move the <policy> before the <doTry>
>
>
>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM, ext2 <xu...@tongtech.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi:
>>
>> The camel's transaction required the transacted-error-handler, but try-catch
>> required no-error-handler. They will conflict; following is a sample that
>> the try-catch cannot works while using transaction. but I am not sure if
>> this is bug or just a camel's limit?
>>
>> For example, the following route :
>>
>> <doTry>
>> <policy ref="PROPAGATION_REQUIRED">
>> <pipeline>
>> <to uri="ibatis:table.add?statementType=Insert"/>
>> <bean ref="errorbean" method="raiseError"/>
>> </pipeline>
>> </policy>
>> <doCatch>
>> <exception>java.lang.Exception</exception>
>> <bean ref="mybean" method="foo"/>
>> </doCatch>
>>
>> As for normal understanding: the errorbean(just after ibatis) raise error,
>> so the pipeline will marked as rollback status, but the exception is still
>> exist, and the catch clause will be execute.And in camel, doCatch cannot be
>> execute;
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>