axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Amila Suriarachchi <amilasuriarach...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Non blocking with two channel is broken
Date Sat, 06 Aug 2011 03:27:56 GMT
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Deepal Jayasinghe <deepalk@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Amila Suriarachchi
> <amilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Deepal Jayasinghe <deepalk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Amila, You might not remember the two transport functionality since
> >> this was done a long time ago, and in fact those days you were
> >> contributing the ADB and code generation. Actually, the long running
> >> services idea was initially developed based on the two transport
> >> semantics.
> >>
> >> The correct way to handle two transport or any request with replyTo
> >> (not anonymous), is to send the ACK on the request transport and send
> >> the reply through the reply to address. So, we had this feature and I
> >> have used and demoed this feature a number of times in various
> >> conferences.
> >
> > This is exactly what happens when you set that parameter and when the
> server
> > receives an message with replyTo header.
>
> I agree, but two different scenario, in the long running case service
> author knows about it and he sets the parameter. In the two transport
> case, client does not aware of anything but he need to get the
> response using different transport.
>

Do you say that when the client set the replyTo header and send a message,
he does not get the
reply to the address given in replyTo header?

thanks,
Amila.


>
> Thanks,
> Deepal
> >
> > thanks,
> > Amila.
> >
> >>
> >> I sent this email to mailing list to see whether someone has removed
> >> the source code as part of some discussion, because I am sure I have
> >> missed some long discussion after 2008. Now, it is sure that this
> >> feature was not removed intentionally. So I will fix it correctly.
> >>
> >> With my academic work I hardly find time to go through the mailing
> >> list and try to respond as much as I can. So going through commit
> >> messages is not a practical solution for me (though I spent two hours
> >> doing that). In fact I am not actively looking at Axis2 code base
> >> since 2008, so it is hard for me to navigate all those changes.
> >>
> >> Thanks all of you for the actively participation, I will implement
> >> this feature correctly (of course when I find a free time).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Deepal
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Amila Suriarachchi
> >> <amilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Deepal jayasinghe <deepalk@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Deepal Jayasinghe <deepalk@gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I looked and the code segment you mentioned, but that
is to
> process
> >> >>> >> long
> >> >>> >> running services. We had somewhat similar code to process
request
> >> >>> >> comes with
> >> >>> >> replyTo header. If no one has removed then, we can fix
the issue
> in
> >> >>> >> AMR.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > This is for processing addressing headers with replyTo header.
> >> >>> I agree, but that is inside isAsync, so we need to have the
> parameter
> >> >>> to come to this logic.
> >> >>
> >> >> yes you need to add this parameter DO_ASYNC = "messageReceiver.
> >> >> invokeOnSeparateThread"  to services.xml.
> >> >>
> >> >> Do you want to make this by default. Then what about the backward
> >> >> compatibility :)
> >> >>
> >> >> Long running services and two transports non-blocking invocations are
> >> >> two
> >> >> different things. So, we do not need to make DO_ASYN the default.
> >> >> However, I
> >> >> am talking about the removal of an existing functionalities, so
> >> >> backward
> >> >> compatibility is already broken.
> >> >
> >> > I am not sure about the functionality you talk about. Is it possible
> you
> >> > to
> >> > find the commit which has removed that functionality you talk about?
> >> >
> >> > thanks,
> >> > Amila.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks.,
> >> >> Deepal
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Amila Suriarachchi
> >> > WSO2 Inc.
> >> > blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> http://blogs.deepal.org
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Amila Suriarachchi
> > WSO2 Inc.
> > blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://blogs.deepal.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Amila Suriarachchi
WSO2 Inc.
blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/

Mime
View raw message