axis-c-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Samisa Abeysinghe <samisa_abeysin...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Analysis of Axis C++ client transport
Date Mon, 27 Sep 2004 02:04:42 GMT
Hi John,

>Does the new transport have support for chunking  
Yes it does, but assuming the whole message would be in one chunk. As Sanjiva has mentioned,
this
works perfect with Axis Java - as far as I tested.
Going through the mail thread, sounds like we need to support multiple chunks, which I hope
I
could add to the code.

> (and any other things that the old transport had)?
Yes, timeout is supported. 
Proxy is not (I need to add some code)

Thanks,
Samisa...


--- Aleksander Slominski <aslom@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:

> hi,
> 
> i think if message size is bigger than some threshold or if underlying 
> IO stream is flushed then chunk is sent (and yes i have seen this with  
> my own eyes in tomcat 4.19 yesterday in my own app) - so even if SOAP 
> APP writes all in one chunk it may be sent in multiple chunks ...
> 
> BTW: what Maels(t)rom you are talking about - i am pretty sure it is not 
> http://www.devolution.com/~slouken/Maelstrom/
> something more along lines of 
> com.*ibm*.edge.webservices.systemservices.*maelstrom*. from ETTK?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> alek
> 
> John Hawkins wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >Maelsrom - It does do multiple chunks (we've seen them with our own eyes
> >not just specced ;-)
> >
> >
> >John Hawkins
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                                                                           
> >             "Sanjiva                                                      
> >             Weerawarana"                                                  
> >             <sanjiva@opensour                                          To 
> >             ce.lk>                    "Apache AXIS C Developers List"     
> >                                       <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>         

> >             24/09/2004 09:57                                           cc 
> >                                                                           
> >                                                                   Subject 
> >             Please respond to         Re: Analysis of Axis C++ client     
> >              "Apache AXIS C           transport                           
> >             Developers List"                                              
> >                                                                           
> >                                                                           
> >                                                                           
> >                                                                           
> >                                                                           
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >One chunk .. WAS uses Axis/Java. Unless you're referring to
> >Maelstrom .. in which case I don't know whether it does real
> >chunking.
> >
> >Sanjiva.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "John Hawkins" <HAWKINSJ@uk.ibm.com>
> >To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> >Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 2:32 PM
> >Subject: Re: Analysis of Axis C++ client transport
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>WAS  does chunking - this is where we found the issue in the first place
> >>:-)
> >>
> >>
> >>John Hawkins
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             "Sanjiva
> >>             Weerawarana"
> >>             <sanjiva@opensour
> >>    
> >>
> >To
> >  
> >
> >>             ce.lk>                    "Apache AXIS C Developers List"
> >>                                       <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> >>             23/09/2004 17:24
> >>    
> >>
> >cc
> >  
> >
> >>    
> >>
> >Subject
> >  
> >
> >>             Please respond to         Re: Analysis of Axis C++ client
> >>              "Apache AXIS C           transport
> >>             Developers List"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>I don't get why we're bothering with chunking .. can you tell
> >>me which server-side does chunking right now? Axis/Java
> >>certainly does not - it always sends one chunk!
> >>
> >>Also, if we're not doing keep-alive, then you can forget
> >>about computing content length and just stream the output thru
> >>without bufferring. That gives you the memory benefit you get
> >>from chunking at a loss of the keep-alive feature. As we
> >>move forward in Web services in a more message-oriented model,
> >>I don't see keep-alive being such a vital feature: its not
> >>likely that apps will do series of very small and repeated
> >>calls between the same client and server.
> >>
> >>I suggest we forget chunking and add an option at least to turn
> >>off bufferring and content-length computation. That will give
> >>us even more speed!
> >>
> >>Sanjiva.
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "John Hawkins" <HAWKINSJ@uk.ibm.com>
> >>To: "Apache AXIS C Developers List" <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> >>Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 4:17 PM
> >>Subject: Re: Analysis of Axis C++ client transport
> >>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Hi Samisa,
> >>>
> >>>Does the new transport have support for chunking  (and any other things
> >>>that the old transport had)?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>John Hawkins
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>             Samisa Abeysinghe
> >>>             <samisa_abeysingh
> >>>             e@yahoo.com>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>To
> >>    
> >>
> >>>                                       Apache AXIS C Developers List
> >>>             23/09/2004 04:20          <axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org>
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>cc
> >>    
> >>
> >>>             Please respond to
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Subject
> >>    
> >>
> >>>              "Apache AXIS C           Re: Analysis of Axis C++ client
> >>>             Developers List"          transport
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Hi All,
> >>>    The new transport that I was talking about is in CVS
> >>>(src/transport/axis2/)
> >>>    This borrows many logic from the old one, however there are some
> >>>considerable logic changes as
> >>>well (but no magic ;-))
> >>>
> >>>    I strongly suggest that we try using this as the default transport
> >>>considering the speed and
> >>>the ability to send larger messages. This is also thread safe, after I
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>made
> >>    
> >>
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com

Mime
View raw message