Camel was created for message processing. One of typical usecase for
camel is business processes. The key points are:
* use of a higher level language to describe your business process: in
ODE you have BPEL, in camel you don't, but you have EIPs (via a DSL
supported in a few languages, including java and xml).
* camel is payload agnostic, can be any pojo, you can even use pojos for
processing data, ODE uses (ultimately) xsd defined types, so a bit more
complicated.
* camel is stateless (also scales better because of that), so if you
need state you'd have to handle that yourself. Camel offers a few
components that can help you with that though. ODE processes otoh are
stateful.
Bottom line, it depends on your process and what you want to do, how you
want to define (declare) your business logic, deploy, etc.
I hope this helps.
Hadrian
On 03/22/2012 12:36 PM, Hugo wrote:
Hi everyone,
I am wondering which advantages I could have using Camel for orchestration
tasks (like sequence of webservices calls) rather than Apache ODE ?
The only point I am aware right now, it is : with Camel I can do it in java
(even if Camel wasnot initially created for orchestration) and with ODE it
uses BPEL language.
My architecture is based on the ESB ServiceMix using ActiveMQ to receive
business task, Camel to transport and Camel or ODE for orchestration.
There are some limitations using one or the other ? Could somebody provide
me a projects feedback of a similar case ?
If I've got a high traffic, there is an impact on the use of one or the
other framework ?
Thanks in advance,
Regards,
--
View this message in context:
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Orchestration-with-Camel-tp5587114p5587114.html
Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Hadrian Zbarcea
Principal Software Architect
Talend, Inc
http://coders.talend.com/
http://camelbot.blogspot.com/
