I'm trying to setup a smart JMS deadLetterChannel where the final uri of the DLQ is computed dynamically, depending on original queue name (eg adding a ".dead" suffix).
I have seen in the doc that it's possible by setting the CamelJmsDestinationName header.
Therefore, I tried this:
DefaultErrorHandlerBuilder dlc = deadLetterChannel("jms:queue:dummy")
.useOriginalMessage()
.maximumRedeliveries(2);
dlc.onPrepareFailure( exchange -> {
// Override destination
exchange.getMessage().setHeader("CamelJmsDestinationName", "jms:queue:test");
});
I have tried many different values for CamelJmsDestinationName :
"jms:queue:test"
"queue:test"
"test"
But none of them is working; the header is ignored and the exchange always goes to original uri ("queue:dummy").
What am I doing wrong ??
I'm using Camel 3.6 and camel-sjms2 component bound to an Artemis ActiveMQ broker:
#Resource(mappedName = "java:/ConnectionFactory")
private static ConnectionFactory connectionFactory;
#Produces
#ApplicationScoped
#Named("jms")
public final Sjms2Component createJmsComponent() {
Sjms2Component component = new Sjms2Component();
ConnectionResource pool = new ConnectionFactoryResource(poolSize, connectionFactory);
component.setConnectionResource(pool);
return component;
}
Related
Issue:
I have multiple route sending messages to an ActiveMQ queue which later gets processed by a processor to save status information
The same message sending from ProducerTemplate to ActiveMQ queue somehow breakes the same code by not triggering logs on console, and saving status information to a randomly generated file name.
Desired Behavior:
Both sending method gets the messages processed the same way
Code Explanation:
On below codes the Save processor is the one producing the weird behavior where logs dont show up on console and writes to some random file, file name is basically the clientID from ActiveMQ
StartRoute calling the activemq:save works correctly
Code:
public class Save implements Processor {
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
try {
Map<String, Object> map = new HashMap<String, Object>() {};
map.put(".....", ".....");
map.put(".....", ".....");
map.put(".....", ".....");
map.put(".....", ".....");
ProducerTemplate template = exchange.getContext().createProducerTemplate();
String response = template.requestBodyAndHeaders("activemq:save", "Batch Job Started", map, String.class);
FluentProducerTemplate FluentTemplate = exchange.getContext().createFluentProducerTemplate();
String result = FluentTemplate
.withHeader(".....", ".....")
.withHeader(".....", ".....")
.withHeader(".....", ".....")
.withHeader(".....", ".....")
.withHeader(".....", ".....")
.to("activemq:save")
.request(String.class);
} catch (Exception e) {
.....
}
}
}
public class StartRoute extends RouteBuilder {
restConfiguration()
.component("servlet")
.enableCORS(true);
rest("/start").id("start")
.post("/{filename}")
.route()
.....
.process(new Save())
.wireTap(startBackgroundProcessRoute)
.to("activemq:save")
.endRest();
}
public class SaveRoute extends RouteBuilder {
from("activemq:save")
.log("started saving")
.process(new FormatText())
.to("file:///status");
}
This question came from my original problem described here:
Camel Multicast Route call order
Solution can be found also there:
Camel Multicast Route call order
However to satisfy this question:
It seems Camel have few bugs regarding producer templates and maybe ActiveMQ, this is my initial conclusion.
The Only way i was able to use ProducerTemplate without issue is to use the send function with Exchanges, send() sends the messages correctly to the ActiveMQ same way as the to() however for whatever reason the content was still not written to the file.
After I dropped the ActiveMQ between the routes, everything started to work consistently. So possible miss configuration on ActiveMQ component or possible another camel framework bug.
If anyone knows the exact answer i would be happy to hear / see the reason for this behavior.
Code example:
public class SaveProcessor implements Processor {
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
ProducerTemplate template = exchange.getContext().createProducerTemplate();
template.send(Utilities.trackBatchJobStatus, exchange);
/** NOTE
* DO NOT USE any other functions which are not working with EXCHANGES.
* Functions that uses body, header values and such are bugged
*/
}
}
I have a GlobalExceptionHandler class which contain multiple methods annotated with #ExceptionHandler.
#ExceptionHandler({ AccessDeniedException.class })
public final ResponseEntity<Object> handleAccessDeniedException(
Exception ex, WebRequest request) {
return new ResponseEntity<Object>(
"Access denied message here", new HttpHeaders(), HttpStatus.FORBIDDEN);
}
I have a AOP which is suppose to be triggered after the exception handler returns response.
#AfterReturning(value="#annotation(exceptionHandler)",returning="response")
public void afterReturningAdvice(JoinPoint joinPoint, Object response) {
//do something
}
But the #AfterReturning is not triggered after the handler returns a valid response.
Tried full qualified name but not working
#AfterReturning(value = "#annotation(org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.ExceptionHandler)", returning = "response"){
public void afterReturningAdvice(JoinPoint joinPoint, Object response) {
//do something
}
Please go through the documentation to understand the proxying mechanisms in Spring framework.
Assuming the ExceptionHandler code written was of the following format
#ControllerAdvice
public class TestControllerAdvice {
#ExceptionHandler({ AccessDeniedException.class })
final public ResponseEntity<Object> handleAccessDeniedException(
Exception ex, WebRequest request) {
return new ResponseEntity<Object>(
"Access denied message here", new HttpHeaders(), HttpStatus.FORBIDDEN);
}
}
key points from the documentation pertaining to the question are
Spring AOP uses either JDK dynamic proxies or CGLIB to create the
proxy for a given target object.
If the target object to be proxied implements at least one
interface, a JDK dynamic proxy is used. All of the interfaces
implemented by the target type are proxied. If the target object
does not implement any interfaces, a CGLIB proxy is created.
With CGLIB, final methods cannot be advised, as they cannot be overridden in runtime-generated subclasses.
OP identified the issue based on the comments and hints , this answer is for any future references.
I have a Camel route which converts JSON to an object and passes it on to a processor class. Code is below. This ActiveMQ consumer is not acknowledging some messages, causing the topic to get backed up. The code does not explicitly set acknowledgement mode but a breakpoint shows these values -
acknowledgementMode = -1
acknowledgementModeName = null
What should be changed to ensure acknowledgements are sent on both successful processing and when an exception occurs inside the processor class?
#Component
public class MyRoute extends RouteBuilder {
private String mySubscription;
private MyProcessor myProcessor;
public MyRoute(#Value("${my.topic}") String tripSubscription, MyProcessor myProcessor) {
this.mySubscription = mySubscription;
this.myProcessor = myProcessor;
}
#Override
public void configure() {
from(mySubscription)
.unmarshal().json(JsonLibrary.Jackson, MyDTO.class)
.bean(myProcessor, "process(${body})")
.end();
}
}
The processor class -
#Slf4j
#Component
#AllArgsConstructor
public class MyProcessor {
public void process(MyDTO dto) {
//code that throws exception
}
}
The Camel JMS component docs at Github says that the default acknowledge mode is AUTO_ ACKNOWLEDGE.
However, the older docs at camel.apache.org says the default is -1 what corresponds to the value you see. Either the default was changed in a recent version or the new docs at Github are wrong.
The value -1 is somehow invalid because it is none of the defined modes.
Therefore you could give it a try to explicitly set acknowledgementModeName=AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE on your consumer.
Side note… looks like you’re not setting “tripSubscription” into and instance variable if that was your intent…
It is possible to pass parameters to a Camel route?, for instance, in the next code snippet:
public class MyRoute extends RouteBuilder {
public void configure() throws Exception {
from("direct:start")
.to("cxf:bean:inventoryEndpoint?dataFormat=PAYLOAD");
}
}
The value for dataFormat is in hard code, but, what if I want set it dynamically?, passing a value from the code where route is called. I know this is possible adding a constructor and passing parameters in it, like this:
public class MyRoute extends RouteBuilder {
private String type;
public MyRoute(String type){
this.type = type;
}
public void configure() throws Exception {
from("direct:start")
.to("cxf:bean:inventoryEndpoint?dataFormat=" + type);
}
}
There is another way?
Thanks so much!
As you mentioned, you can use a constructor (or setters or any other Java/Framework instruments) if the parameters are static from a Camel point of view.
The parameters are configurable in the application, but after the application is started they do no more change. So, every message processed by the Camel route uses the same value.
In contrast, when the parameters are dynamic - i.e. they can change for every processed message, you can use the dynamic endpoint toD() of Camel. These endpoint addresses can contain expressions that are computed on runtime. For example the route
from("direct:start")
.toD("${header.foo}");
sends messages to a dynamic endpoint and takes the value from the message header named foo.
Or to use your example
.toD("cxf:bean:inventoryEndpoint?dataFormat=${header.dataFormat}");
This way you can set the dataformat for every message individually through a header.
You can find more about dynamic endpoints on this Camel documentation page
I would like to write a Camel Route that gets in a URI (can be http, ftp, file, ...) and then fetches the data and stores it locally in a file.
This URI-String could be, for example:
"ftp://localhost/example.txt"
"file://tmp/example.txt"
"jms:queue:dataInputQueue"
...
Based on this string, the correct Camel Component should be used to access the data. Something like a case/switch in Java:
(1) Receive URI (from uri="vm:incomingUri")
(2) Chose "right" Camel Component
switch(URI)
case HTTP: use Camel HTTP component
case FTP: use Camel FTP component
case JMS: use Camel JMS component
...
(3) Read data from that URI, using the "right" Camel component
(4) Store file locally (to uri="file://...)
Example:
From "vm:incomingUri" I read a String "ftp://localhost/example.txt". That what finally needs to happen now should be equivalent to this:
<route>
<from uri="ftp://localhost/example.txt"/>
<to uri="file://tmpDir/example.txt"/>
</route>
How would this look like in Camel?
I believe one difficulty will be that, for the components you mention (HTTP, FTP, file, JMS), you may want to use either a producer or a consumer:
FTP, File: definitely a consumer to read a file.
HTTP (or HTTP4): definitely a producer, to send a request to the server (the server's reply will by the new message body)
JMS: depends on wether you want to read from a queue (consumer), or send a message to a queue with a ReplyTo header, then wait for the answer (producer).
Producers :
If you are using Camel 2.16+, you can use the new "dynamic to" syntax. It's basically the same as a regular "to", except that the endpoint uri can be evaluated dynamically using a simple expression (or, optionnaly, another type of expression). Alternatively, you can use the enrich flavor of the content-enricher pattern, wich also supports dynamic uris starting with Camel 2.16.
If you are using an older version of Camel, or if you need to dynamically route to several endpoints (not just one), you can use the recipient list pattern.
Here's an exemple. We will transform the message body by calling an endpoint; the uri for that endpoint will be found in a header named TargetUri and will be evaluated dynamically for each message.
// An instance of this class is registered as 'testbean' in the registry. Instead of
// sending to this bean, I could send to a FTP or HTTP endpoint, or whatever.
public class TestBean {
public String toUpperCase(final String str) {
return str.toUpperCase();
}
}
// This route sends a message to our example route for testing purpose. Of course, we
// could send any message as long as the 'TargetUri' header contains a valid endpoint uri
from("file:inbox?move=done&moveFailed=failed")
.setHeader("TargetUri").constant("bean:testbean?method=toUpperCase")
.setBody().constant("foo")
.to("direct:test");
// 1. The toD example :
from("direct:test")
.toD("${header.TargetUri}")
.to("log:myRoute");
// 2. The recipient list example :
from("direct:test")
.recipientList(header("TargetUri"))
.to("log:myRoute");
// 3. The enrich example :
from("direct:test")
.enrich().simple("${header.TargetUri}") // add an AggregationStrategy if necessary
.to("log:myRoute");
Consumers :
With Camel 2.16+, you can use the pollEnrich flavor of the content-enricher pattern.
For older versions of Camel, you can use a ConsumerTemplate in a processor.
// 4. The pollEnrich example (assuming the TargetUri header contains, e.g., a file
// or ftp uri) :
from("direct:test")
.pollEnrich().simple("${header.TargetUri}") // add an AggregationStrategy if necessary
.to("log:myRoute");
// 5. The ConsumerTemplate example (same assumption as above)
from("direct:test")
.process(new Processor() {
#Override
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
String uri = exchange.getIn().getHeader("TargetUri", String.class);
ConsumerTemplate consumer = exchange.getContext().createConsumerTemplate();
final Object data = consumer.receiveBody(uri);
exchange.getIn().setBody(data);
}
})
.to("log:myRoute");
Producer or consumer?
Sadly, I can't think of any really elegant solution to handle both - I think you will have to route to two branches based on the uri and known components... Here's the sort of thing I might do (with Camel 2.16+), it's not very pretty:
// This example only handles http and ftp endpoints properly
from("direct:test")
.choice()
.when(header("TargetUri").startsWith("http"))
.enrich().simple("${header.TargetUri}")
.endChoice()
.when(header("TargetUri").startsWith("ftp"))
.pollEnrich().simple("${header.TargetUri}")
.endChoice()
.end()
.to("log:myRoute");
It is possible by using
<to uri="{{some.endpoint}}"/>
But you would require to add it in property .
<cm:property name="some.endpoint" value="SomeEndPoint"/>
And you can add any endpoint you want http, ftp, file, log, jms, vm etc.
Value of SomeEndPoint.
Log Component: log:mock
JMS Component: activemq:someQueueName
File Component: file://someFileShare
VMComponent: vm:toSomeRoute