synapse-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jaliya Ekanayake" <jaliya.ekanay...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Synapse and WSRM
Date Sat, 24 Dec 2005 18:52:06 GMT
Hi Dims and Paul,

Yes, true, Thanks for the explanation

Thanks,

Jaliya
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Paul Fremantle 
  To: synapse-dev@ws.apache.org ; dims@apache.org 
  Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 1:37 PM
  Subject: Re: Synapse and WSRM


  Exactly Dims. Also Synapse could log the message. Then if Synapse fails to deliver it or
the message is later lost, there is a record. This is a common pattern in B2B scenarios.

  Paul


  On 12/24/05, Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com> wrote:
    Jaliya,

    Not if it is over JMS. right?

    -- dims

    On 12/24/05, Jaliya Ekanayake <jaliya.ekanayake@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > Hi Paul and Eran,
    >
    > Do you expect the messages to the other types of web services to go over a
    > network after synapse or does synapse invoke the services by itself.
    > IMHO if the message goes over a network then we break the RM and after that 
    > point we don't have any gurantee.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Jaliya
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: Paul Fremantle
    > To: synapse-dev@ws.apache.org
    > Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 6:41 AM
    > Subject: Re: Synapse and WSRM
    >
    > Eran
    >
    > Exactly right. For example, someone may have a PHP web service or PERL web 
    > service that doesn't support WS-Sec, RM, and Addressing. We can put Synapse
    > in front of the existing service and "terminate" the RM, Sec, and
    > Addressing and then forward the simple SOAP to the Perl service. 
    >
    > Paul
    >
    >
    > On 12/24/05, Eran Chinthaka <chinthaka@opensource.lk> wrote:
    > > Hi Jaliya,
    > >
    > > Let me try to answer this. 
    > >
    > > What if the service is not behind an RM Endpoint Manager. One of the
    > > usages of Synapse, as I think is, it provides the infra-structure for
    > > other web services engines. For example, you can have your Synapse 
    > > engine as a proxy for all the web services engine that are inside your
    > > company. And this Synapse engine will provide you QoS services like RM,
    > > security, etc. so that the internal web services engines do not need to 
    > > worry about them. To me, this is one of the great features of Synapse.
    > > So I believe Synapse should worry abt it.
    > >
    > > Chinthaka
    > >
    > > Jaliya Ekanayake wrote: 
    > >
    > > >Hi Paul,
    > > >
    > > >Please explain why would synapse worry about in-order delivery. If the
    > > >service is behind a RMEndpoint manager then it will handle the INORDER 
    > > >delivery.
    > > >It does not matter whether we lose the order in the mediation level.
    > > >
    > > >Thanks,
    > > >
    > > >Jaliya
    > > >
    > > > 
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >Folks At the hackathon we started talking about RM. The problem with
    > > >RM is where the messages have to be delivered inorder. In that case,
    > > >it is quite possible for the current message to be held up. We do not 
    > > >have support in Synapse for the current processor to be paused and
    > > >restarted. Its possible we have to add it in the future. But there is
    > > >a simpler option we can try first: The message comes in. We process it 
    > > >and it hits the RM processor. The RM processor always finishes this
    > > >"round" of processing (i.e. it returns false). At some point possibly
    > > >now or in the future, the RM processor will re-inject the message. The 
    > > >processor will inject the messages inorder (assuming it is configured
    > > >that way). The RM processor can also set some context flag to identify
    > > >that the message has been processed by the reliability. The message 
    > > >now starts its second round of processing. It is up to the configurer
    > > >to make the second round do something different and process the
    > > >message correctly. This can be done using a rule that checks for the 
    > > >RM context flag we set earlier. So in other words, we are splitting
    > > >the flow into two flows. The first flow is up until the RM processor
    > > >and the second flow starts when the message is delivered inorder. I 
    > > >think we can probably hide some of this in future iterations, but I
    > > >believe this is a good starting point. Paul -- Paul Fremantle
    > > >VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair 
    > > > http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantlepaul@wso2.com
    > >
    > >< https://webmail6.pair.com/src/compose.php?send_to=paul%40wso2.com>
    > > >
    > > >"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
    > > > 
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
    > synapse-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
    > > For additional commands, e-mail: synapse-dev-help@ws.apache.org
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Paul Fremantle
    > VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
    >
    > http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
    > paul@wso2.com
    >
    > "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
    >


    --
    Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ 

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    To unsubscribe, e-mail: synapse-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
    For additional commands, e-mail: synapse-dev-help@ws.apache.org





  -- 
  Paul Fremantle
  VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair

  http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
  paul@wso2.com

  "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com

Mime
View raw message