axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chathura Herath" <chath...@opensource.lk>
Subject RE: [Axis2] Deploying MessageReceivers per Operation
Date Tue, 26 Apr 2005 04:36:04 GMT
+1 to moving Messagereiver to Operation level

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Srinath Perera [mailto:hemapani@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 10:01 AM
> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Axis2] Deploying MessageReceivers per Operation
> 
> Yes in theory AFAIK MessageReceiver per Operation (MEP) make sense. Itmake
> writing a Web Service bit complex. But as users are reusing the in built
> MessageReceiver I think that is ok. So Deepal shall we movethe
> messageReceiver attribute to the Opeartion level rather than atthe service
> level?
> ThanksSrinath
> On 4/26/05, Jaliya Ekanayake <jaliya@opensource.lk> wrote:> Chathura
> Herath wrote:> > >Hi Jaliya, Deepal, all> >> >Its exactly my point,
the
> MessgeReceiver is per MEP not per operation as the heading of this thread
> implies(nor its per service). MEP is a real pain and there is an
> unprecedented need for properly handling it.> >> >You are right about
> there is a need of a MessageReciever per given MEP and the fact that given
> service can have operations with different MEP can be resolved making sure
> we select the right receiver in the Dispatch phase. Anyway we are doing it
> now but apparently we have only the IN_OUT MEP Receiver and infact we are
> in the process of writing a general framework for MEPs. I.e. Proper
> figuring out of MEP aware receives and MEP aware MEPContexts.> >So we are
> converging I think....> >> >Btw any thought of my use case stated in the
> earlier mail. Restating.. If both the ping operation and the echo
> operation requires to use the same transport (e.g. HTTP would be a likely)
> due to some external constraint like RM, we ll have to get the engine to
> reuse same transport for two or more different MEP.> >> >Is this a valid
> use case??> >> >Comments??> >> >Thanks,> >Chathura>
>>
> >________________________________________> >From: Jaliya Ekanayake
> [mailto:jaliya@opensource.lk]> >Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 5:22 PM>
> >To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org> >Subject: RE: [Axis2] Deploying
> MessageReceivers per Operation> >> >Hi Chathura, Deepal and All,> >>
>I
> would like to pay your attention to the following class.> >> >public class
> MyService {> >    public void ping(String pingStr){> >        //Ping
> implementation> >    }> >> >    public String echo(String echoStr){>
>
> //Echo String implementatino> >        return echoStr;> >    }> >}>
>>
> >Now if we need to deploy this as a web service containing two operations
> (one with IN-ONLY MEP and the other with IN-OUT MEP) we are in trouble if
> we just allow the user to mention one message receiver per service.> >>
> >Further, I am referring to the following lines( in the Axis 1.2
> JavaProvider)> >> >--------------------------------> >> >if (operation
!=
> null &&   operation.getMep() == OperationType.ONE_WAY) {> >
> msgContext.setResponseMessage(null);> >            } else {> >
> Message        resMsg  = msgContext.getResponseMessage();> >> >-----------
> --------------------> >> >Now in our MessageReceiver we don't need to
> check the operation type, since we have some special MEP aware
> MessageReceivers. Only problem is that we may have many operations in one
> service with different MEPs> >> >Comments?> >> >Thanks,> >>
>Jaliya> >> >>
> >________________________________________> >From: Chathura Herath
> [mailto:chathura@opensource.lk]> >Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 2:48 PM>
> >To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org> >Subject: RE: [Axis2] Deploying
> MessageReceivers per Operation> >> >Hi Jaliya, Deepal, all> >> >I
think we
> haven't looked at the problem in the correct angle. MEP and Operation have
> a one to many relation ship so it will not be right to say we let each
> operation have its own message receiver, neither it is correct to say we
> should have a message receivers per service because the MEP is defined per
> operation.> >> >Many Operation → use→ One MEP> >> >The problem
that jaliya
> has pointed out is very valid and believe we need to give proper
> attention. But we have missed out one salient point here. The original MEP
> was an IN_ONLY MEP but since the operation requires secure conversation
> the security module need to send out a message  and get a message back.>
> >The point in that in this case the security module has created a new
> MEP(OUT_IN if you consider this EPR to be a server or it's the client side
> of the IN_OUT MEP ) which is orthogonal to the original MEP IN_ONLY.
> Further more now the endpoint has two parallel MEP's running> >1) Original
> IN_ONLY MEP :- This will have a receiver – a InOnlyReceiver> >2) OUT_IN
> MEP created by the security module :- This will have its own receiver.
> (Like a normal client)> >> >Now I believe there are no misunderstanding of
> having MessageReceivers because above two message receivers will be
> provided and this operation and the security module can use them. And any
> other service who has IN_ONLY MEP can use the above message receiver. Am I
> right?> >> >Complications come when you want to use the same transport to
> get everything done. That we have to figure out a way to get the engine to
> reuse our old same transport.> >> >Comments?> >> >Cheers>
>Chathura> >> >>
> >________________________________________> >From: Deepal Jayasinghe
> [mailto:deepal@opensource.lk]> >Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 10:30 AM>
> >To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org> >Subject: Re: [Axis2] Deploying
> MessageReceivers per Operation> >> >Hi Jaliya;> >> >I think we
can handle
> operation basic receivers inside Message receiver , that is because when
> some one implement a service he has to write a MessageReciver for his
> service  , so inside the messagereciver he can write all the logic he
> needs to handle operation basis reciever , that is inside
> messagereciver.recive() he can implement those logic.> >> >as an example>
> >> >MyReciver extends MessageReciver {> >> > public void
> recieve(MessageContext context){> >    MyOperationReciever myop = new
> MyOperationReciever();> >    myop.recieve(context);> >  }> >}> >>
>> >so
> if we do that in this way I think we do not need to define per operation
> basis receivers.> >> >Comments ....> >> >Deepal> >>
>Hi All,> >>
> >According the current implementation of Axis2, when we deploy a service,
> we can specify one MessageReceiver (InOnlyMessageReceiver,
> InOutMessageReceiver etc..) per service. According to my understanding we
> should let the user to register one MessageReceiver per operation basis.
> Possible example would be as follows.> >> >We have a web service with IN-
> ONLY operation. However we need to let the service to implement the
> RequestSecurityToken operation according to the WS-SecCon. This operation
> is an IN-OUT operation. In this situation we have to register two message
> receivers to these two operations. In addition, the MEP is bind to an
> operation and the MessageReceiver is the one who is driving the MEP. So I
> think we have let each operation to have its own message receiver.> >>
> >thoughts ??> >> >Thanks,> >> >Jaliya> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Hi Chathura,>
> > IMHO, there may not be a use case similar to what you have mentioned.>
> There may be a case for one MEP to use the same transport or different>
> transports, but not between MEPs> > Thanks,> > Jaliya>




Mime
View raw message