axis-c-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Samisa Abeysinghe <sabeysin...@virtusa.com>
Subject RE: Restructuring Call::initialize
Date Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:38:32 GMT
SOAP Header tests has been failing due to a bug in the transport. I
fixed that and those are also passing.
We now only have to verify that SSL works with these changes.

Thanks,
Samisa...

On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 11:40, Samisa Abeysinghe wrote:
> I have commited my initial changes to the CVS.
> The commit was done after running the test cycle. 
> 
> I get the SOAP header tests failing, and I am looking into the problem.
> The reason to commit the changes early is that I need some help with SSL
> related testing as I haven't got the SSL tests up and running.
> 
> Thanks,
> Samisa...
> 
> On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 11:17, Samisa Abeysinghe wrote:
> > I am in the process of moving all Call::openConnection() logic into
> > the Call class constructor.
> > 
> > So far I have been somewhat successful but some of the tests are
> > failing.
> > 
> > However, it looks to me that Call::openConnection() should not be
> > there at all (Please see the sequence diagram that I sent earlier) and
> > as I have discussed earlier, at the moment this is called multiple
> > times for each method invocation. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Once I get around the problems with moving Call::openConnection() to
> > constructor, I plan to reuse the ClientAxisEngine, MessageData,
> > SOAPSerializer and SOAPDeSerializer objects, instead of destroying
> > them on each method call.
> > 
> > My feeling is that this will lead to improved performance, though I
> > have not yet planned how to measure it. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Samisa…
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Samisa Abeysinghe [mailto:SAbeysinghe@virtusa.com] 
> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 4:34 PM
> > To: Apache AXIS C Developers List
> > Subject: RE: Restructuring Call::initialize
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Yes, ClientAxisEengine is deleted for each method, despite the fact we
> > are using the same Stub object.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Deleting the engine every time has to be removed and move some of the
> > init logic which is one off to the constructor.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I have attached a sequence diagram herewith to help understanding
> > Call::initialize(). It looks to me that Call::initialize triggers a
> > deep set of method calls. Some activities like buffer clearing has to
> > be done every time before a fresh invoke. However, some activities
> > like setting the end point can be one off.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Samisa…
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sanjaya gayan [mailto:sanjayagps@yahoo.co.uk] 
> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 4:01 PM
> > To: Apache AXIS C Developers List
> > Subject: Re: Restructuring Call::initialize
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > It looks to me like with each call to Call::Initialize() if a
> > ClientAxisEngine object exists it is deleted and then a new one
> > created and initialized (I am not sure whether
> > ClientAxisEngine->Initialize() caters for this).
> > 
> > 
> > Shouldn't it be that if a AxisClient object exists it should be reused
> > by intializing and a new one created only if there is no AxisClient
> > object?
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > I guess that the deleting of the existing object could be removed, in
> > which case initializing the ClientAxisEngine (which should "intialize"
> > all members of the ClientAxisEngine. not sure whether this is the
> > current behaviour) with each call to Call::Initialize has to be done.
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > sanjaya.
> > 
> > 
> > Samisa Abeysinghe <sabeysinghe@virtusa.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >         Hi All,
> >         I am looking into the Call::initialize() method that is being
> >         called within the client side generated code, 
> >         prior to each method invocation.
> >         
> >         Basically if we have 2 method calls that we could invoke, and
> >         in the client program we execute both those methods, 
> >         we will be calling initialize() on the m_pCall member of the
> >         stub object twice.
> >         However, having a glance into Call::initialize() it looks to
> >         me that some of the activities could be made one off
> >         instead of executing them multiple times for each method
> >         invocation.
> >         
> >         Some of the candidate calls that I want to make one off is
> >         initing the AxisClientEngine once, thus reusing the 
> >         serializer and deserializer objects for multiple calls.
> >         It would be helpful if one of the original designers of this
> >         mechanism could rationalize the initial design so that 
> >         I would not miss any important points here.
> >         
> >         Thanks,
> >         Samisa...
> >         
> >                                    
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > 
> > How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for
> > FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos
-- 
Samisa Abeysinghe <sabeysinghe@virtusa.com>
Virtusa Corporation

Mime
View raw message