ws-sandesha-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chamikara Jayalath <chamikar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Sandesha2] Acknowledging policy
Date Mon, 09 Jan 2006 07:21:34 GMT
Hi Jaliya,

See my comments below.

On 1/8/06, Jaliya Ekanayake <jnekanayake@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Chamikara and All,
>
> Please see my comments below.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jaliya
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Chamikara Jayalath <chamikaramj@gmail.com>
> *To:* sandesha-dev@ws.apache.org
> *Sent:* Saturday, January 07, 2006 11:56 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Sandesha2] Acknowledging policy
>
>
>
> yes, But if the server sends the messages and fail before he actually
> invoke the service, the client will proceed believing that the service got
> actually invoked. It is not important weather the message got lost in the
> wire, or it got lost within the server, the result is the same (the service
> did not get invoked). So the result is equal to acknowledging a message the
> server did not receive.
> But performance wise what you say is very correct. If the server consume a
> long time to invoke the service, the client will also have to wait a long
> time for an acknowledgement
>
>
> Your point is correct, but can we generalize this to suite all the cases?
> Say we acknowledge the only when the service gets invoked, but if the
> service takes a long time to complete then we are waiting unnecessarily for
> acknowledgements.
> It can be a option in Sandesha but it should not be the default case. Many
> people worry about the message losses than the failover so we have to
> support the common case efficiently.
>
>
OK. Then lets make this an option. If people can provide a true acksTo
endpoint and if they can bear the time that is taken for an processing the
request, then they can turn that on. We can turn it off by default.


Thanks,
Chamikara

Mime
View raw message