I'm using ESB and Camel to provide an endpoint to my mobile apps. From there, I need to call multiple web services in such way that the response from the previous call determines whether the next should be called or not and need to pass the same request parameters to the multiple calls.
Additionally, I need to save those response in the database.
I would like to know the best pattern by which we can implement this particular use case using Camel.
there are many ways to do it - just think how you'd like to do such logic as example in pure Java then move it to Camel. From actions flow prospective there is no difference. You have condition - you have to have IF or SWITCH operations that's it.
Straight-forward way.
After calling previous service you have a response in body with attribute that is a decision factor for next call. So, use Camel "choice-when-otherwise" structure (analog of Java "switch" statement) and in "when" use any available ways to check condition from body (i.e. "simple", "xpath", "xquery" etc.)
If logic to identify next call is more complex - create your custom processor which will identify next call, set special exchange property and then go to the same "choice-when-otherwise" block
For that case as example you can have some map with <"previous-result","next-call"> or do it as you'd like to.
and your route may look like (I use Spring):
<cml:to uri="previous_uri"/>
<cml:processor ref="my_selector"/> <!-- it sets Exchange property "next_call" based on result from previous -->
<cml:choice>
<cml:when>
<cml:simple>${exchangeProperty.next_call} =="SERVICE1"/>
<cml:to uri="next_service1_uri"/>
... process Service1 result logic ...
</cml:when>
<cml:when>
<cml:simple>${exchangeProperty.next_call} =="SERVICE2"/>
<cml:to uri="next_service2_uri"/>
... process Service2 result logic ...
</cml:when>
and so on...
Related
i am using cxf as a producer in an apache camel route with WS-Addressing.
I know that it is possible to set the SoapAction Header inside the route via (just as example might be wrong)
...
.setHeader("SoapAction").constant("anysoapactionwanted")
.to("cxf...
is it possible to the same with the WS-Addressing Action field? Because i noticed it is sent with the wrong value. There are 2 WS-Addressing Action values i need to put in and it is decided in the camel route which one to use.
You must be deciding the the required operation based on some value. In that case use Choice-When conditional block to derive correct action.
I have used rest servlet binding to expose route as a service.
I have used employeeClientBean as a POJO , wrapping the actual call to employee REST service within it, basically doing the role of a service client.
So, based on the method name passed, I call the respective method in employee REST service, through the employeeClientBean.
I want to know how how I can handle the scenarios as added in commments in the block of code.
I am just new to Camel, but felt POJO binding is better as it does not couple us to camel specific APIs like exchange and processor or even use
any specific components.
But, I am not sure how I can handle the above scenarios and return appropriate JSON responses to the user of the route service.
Can someone help me on this.
public void configure() throws Exception {
restConfiguration().component("servlet").bindingMode(RestBindingMode.json)
.dataFormatProperty("prettyPrint", "true")
.contextPath("camelroute/rest").port(8080);
rest("/employee").description("Employee Rest Service")
.consumes("application/json").produces("application/json")
.get("/{id}").description("Find employee by id").outType(Employee.class)
.to("bean:employeeClientBean? method=getEmployeeDetails(${header.id})")
//How to handle and return response to the user of the route service for the following scenarios for get/{id}"
//1.Passed id is not a valid one as per the system
//2.Failure to return details due to some issues
.post().description("Create a new Employee ").type(Employee.class)
.to("bean:employeeClientBean?method=createEmployee");
//How to handle and return correct response to the user of the route service for the following scenarios "
//1. Employee being created already exists in the system
//2. Some of the fields of employee passed are as not as per constraints on them
//3. Failure to create a employee due to some issues in server side (For Eg, DB Failure)
}
I fear you are putting Camel to bad use - as per the Apache documentation the REST module is supporting Consumer implementations, e.g. reading from a REST-endpoint, but NOT writing back to a caller.
For your use case you might want to switch framework. Syntactically, Ratpack goes in that direction.
I want to perform custom logic in an IdempotentConsumer. I've extended the class and implemented the logic. How can I add this to my route?
Do I have to make my own Definition class? Do I add it as a Processor? How do I get the parameters passed to the constructor?
Well, custom consumer/producer could be little overkill. I think for some kind of custom logic is enough to do it trough processor or custom bean.
1.Bean
Look at bean binding you can use simple language to pass arguments to your method. It will looks like this:
.bean(OrderService.class, "doSomething(${body}, true)")
.to("bean:orderService?method=doSomething(null, true)")
2.Processor
You have to realize your classes should be stateless because of concurrent matter of camel framework. Your constructor should be empty and your variables final otherwise whole bunch of magic could happen. Everything you want to pass to your logic component/processor should be passed via Exchange object. You can store your variables in getin() or getOut() messages as headers or body or Exchange properties and pass it to next endpoint. The exchange will change dynamically as it flows trough you camel routes. It should be your one and only one mutable object.
I have 2 routes. The first route uses poll enrich to check if a file is present. The second route uses a poll enrich on the same uri to read and process the file. The first route invokes the second via a SEDA queue, like so:
public void configure() throws Exception {
String myFile = "file://myDir?fileName=MyFile.zip&delete=false&readLock=none";
from("direct:test")
.pollEnrich(myFile, 10000)
.to("seda:myQueue")
;
from("seda:myQueue")
.pollEnrich(myFile, 10000)
.log("Do something with the body")
;
}
As it stands, if I execute the first route, the poll enrich finds a file, but when the poll enrich in the second route executes, it returns a body of null. If I just execute the second route on its own, it retrieves the file correctly.
Why does the second poll enrich return null, is the file locked? (I was hoping using a combination of noop,readLock, and delete=false would prevent any locking)
Does camel consider the second poll enrich as a duplicate, therefore filtering it out? (I have tried implementing my own IdempotentRepository to return false on contains(), but the second pollEnrich still returns null)
You may wonder why I'm trying to enrich from 2 routes, the first route has to check if a number of files exist, only when all files are present (i.e., pollEnrich doesn't return null) can the second route start processing them.
Is there an alternative to pollEnrich that I can use? I'm thinking that perhaps I'll need to create a bean that retrieves a file by URI and returns it as the body.
I'm using camel 2.11.0
I realize this is now an old topic, but I just had a similar problem.
I suggest you try the options:
noop=true
which you already have, and
idempotent=false
To tell Camel it is OK to process the same file twice.
Update after testing:
I actually tested this with both settings as suggested above, it works some times, but under moderate load, it fails, i.e. returns null body for some exchanges, although not all.
The documentation indicates that setting noop=true automatically sets idempotent=true, so I am not sure the idempotent setting is being honoured in this case.
Is there any specific reason why you are not using just one route?
I don't understand why you are using two routes for this. File component can check if the file is there and if it is, pull it. If you are worried about remembering the files so you don't get duplicates, you can use an idempotent repository. At least, based on your question, I don't think you need to complicate the logic using two routes and the content enricher EIP.
the second route returns NULL because the file was already consumed in the first route...if you are just looking for a signal message when all files are present, then use a file consumer along with an aggregator and possibly a claim check to avoid carrying around large payloads in memory, etc...
As you've probably learned this does not work as one might expect
noop=true&idempotent=false
my guess is that Camel ignores idempotent=false and as documented uses instance of MemoryMessageIdRepository. To work around this, one can configure file endpoint to use custom idempotent repo:
noop=true&idempotentRepository=#myRepo
and register custom repository in the registry or spring context:
#Component("myRepo")
public class MyRepo implements IdempotentRepository {
#Override
public boolean contains(Object o) {
return false;
}
...
}
Try pollEnrich with strategyMethodAllowNull="true". By default , this value is false. When it is false, the aggregation strategy looks for the existing Exchange body, to aggregate the content returned from file.
When we make strategyMethodAllowNull="true", the existing body is considered as null. So every time , the content of the file is set into the current exchange body
The DirectComponent documentation gives the following example:
from("activemq:queue:order.in")
.to("bean:orderServer?method=validate")
.to("direct:processOrder");
from("direct:processOrder")
.to("bean:orderService?method=process")
.to("activemq:queue:order.out");
Is there any difference between that and the following?
from("activemq:queue:order.in")
.to("bean:orderServer?method=validate")
.to("bean:orderService?method=process")
.to("activemq:queue:order.out");
I've tried to find documentation on what the behaviour of the to() method is on the Java DSL, but beyond the RouteDefinition javadoc (which gives the very curt "Sends the exchange to the given endpoint") I've come up blank :(
In the very case above, you will not notice much difference. The "direct" component is much like a method call.
Once you start build a bit more complex routes, you will want to segment them in several different parts for multiple reasons.
You can, for instance, create "sub routes" that could be reused among multiple routes in your Camel context. Much like you segment out methods in regular programming to allow reusability and make code more clear. The same goes for sub routes using, for instance the direct component.
The same approach can be extended. Say you want multiple protocols to be used as endpoints to your route. You can use the direct endpoint to create the main route, something like this:
// Three endpoints to one "main" route.
from("activemq:queue:order.in")
.to("direct:processOrder");
from("file:some/file/path")
.to("direct:processOrder");
from("jetty:http://0.0.0.0/order/in")
.to("direct:processOrder");
from("direct:processOrder")
.to("bean:orderService?method=process")
.to("activemq:queue:order.out");
Another thing is that one route is created for each "from()" clause in DSL. A route is an artifact in Camel, and you could do certain administrative tasks towards it with the Camel API, such as start, stop, add, remove routes dynamically. The "to" clause is just an endpoint call.
Once starting to do some real cases with somewhat complexity in Camel, you will note that you cannot get too many "direct" routes.
Direct Component is used to name the logical segment of the route. This is similar process to naming procedures in structural programming.
In your example there is no difference in message flow. In the terms of structural programming, we could say that you make a kind of inline expansion to your route.
Another difference is Direct component doesn't has any thread pool, the direct consumer process method is invoked by the calling thread of direct producer.
Mainly its used for break the complex route configuration like in java we used to have method for reusability. And also by configuring threads at direct route we can reduce the work for calling thread .
from(A).to(B).to(OUT)
is chaining
A --- B --- OUT
But
from(A ).to( X)
from(B ).to( X)
from( X).to( OUT )
where X is a direct:?
is basically like a join
A
\____ OUT
/
B
obviously these are different behaviours, and with the second you could implement anylogic you wanted, not just a serial chain