Menu
No matter how much I read about those two patterns I just can't see the difference.
234
A gateway hides the messaging API provided by Spring Integration. It lets your application's business logic be unaware of the Spring Integration API. By using a generic Gateway, your code interacts with only a simple interface.
An inbound-channel-adapter element (a SourcePollingChannelAdapter in Java configuration) can invoke any method on a Spring-managed object and send a non-null return value to a MessageChannel after converting the method's output to a Message .
The outbound Gateway creates JMS Messages from Spring Integration Messages and then sends to a 'request-destination'.
That's a great question since they are similar in that they provide an application access to a messaging system. It is how they acheive it I think that differentiates them.
The Channel Adapter pattern deals how to get data from an existing system without modifying that system. Typically the Channel Adapdter is implemented out-of-process. Examples often seen are a program that periodically walks an underlying database to find things to enqueue. Of perhaps a stand-alone app that calls a remoting or HTTP API to access a systems data to create messages. The point being, that the non-messaging system is completely unmodified.
I think Message Gateway is more intended for in-process messaging integration. It is really about applying good OO encapsulation around the message subsystem. Perhaps some object in the system is called WorkOrderSender with a method called Send(WorkOrder wo). The implementation of that class shields the application from any details of messaging...to it the call is just another method call. In fact, it should be possible to swap out your messaging vendor or even trade messaging for HTTP or FTP etc.
192
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
