[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1078?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=47970#action_47970 ]
James Strachan commented on CAMEL-1078:
---------------------------------------
Hadrian - removing the generics doesn't mean we should remove the specialised Exchange implementations!
They can be a massive optimisation!
e.g. if you are routing from JMS to JMS and you don't modify the payload at all - you could just forward the JMS message on. Or you can expose the full JMS message to JMS aware consumers.
So I don't see why we need to remove the custom exchange implementations if they add some possible value!
> Do not copy Exchanges at each step to improve performance
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-1078
> URL:
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1078> Project: Apache Camel
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: camel-core
> Affects Versions: 1.5.0
> Reporter: Hadrian Zbarcea
> Assignee: Hadrian Zbarcea
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> The code in DefaultEndpoint.createExchange(Exchange exchange), calls on getExchangeType() to figure out if a new copy of Exchange needs be created. The code relies though on the generic argument of the Endpoint type to figure out the actual Exchange type. With the generics removed part of CAMEL-872, getExchangeType() always returns null, forcing a copy every time.
> There is no real need to extend Exchange, so the proposal for this to make the Exchange final and move the component specific bits, if any, in the Message.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
