You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to savan-dev@ws.apache.org by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> on 2010/05/20 08:18:34 UTC
Questions on TCP Transport
Hi Folks,
I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
Thanks,
Hiranya
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Andreas Veithen <andreas.veithen@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
> the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
> that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
> transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
> verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
> transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
>
Sure, I'll have a look.
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
> Andreas
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <
> hiranya911@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Folks,
> >> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
> >> > to
> >> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> >> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both
> the
> >> > TCP
> >> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> >> > checks
> >> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> >> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> >> > don't
> >> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
> >> > way
> >> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> >> > that
> >> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
> >>
> >> I think both approaches are meaningful:
> >>
> >> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> >> used.
> >> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an
> option.
> >>
> >> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
> >
> > Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> > AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> >
> >>
> >> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> >> AbstractTransportListenerEx
> >
> > +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> >>
> >> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> >> transport was implemented).
> >>
> >> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> >> > patches.
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Hiranya
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> >> > Senior Software Engineer;
> >> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> >> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> >> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Andreas Veithen <andreas.veithen@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
> the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
> that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
> transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
> verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
> transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
>
Sure, I'll have a look.
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
> Andreas
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <
> hiranya911@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Folks,
> >> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
> >> > to
> >> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> >> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both
> the
> >> > TCP
> >> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> >> > checks
> >> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> >> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> >> > don't
> >> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
> >> > way
> >> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> >> > that
> >> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
> >>
> >> I think both approaches are meaningful:
> >>
> >> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> >> used.
> >> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an
> option.
> >>
> >> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
> >
> > Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> > AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> >
> >>
> >> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> >> AbstractTransportListenerEx
> >
> > +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> >>
> >> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> >> transport was implemented).
> >>
> >> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> >> > patches.
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Hiranya
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> >> > Senior Software Engineer;
> >> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> >> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> >> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Andreas Veithen <andreas.veithen@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
> the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
> that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
> transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
> verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
> transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
>
Sure, I'll have a look.
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
> Andreas
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <
> hiranya911@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Folks,
> >> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
> >> > to
> >> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> >> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both
> the
> >> > TCP
> >> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> >> > checks
> >> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> >> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> >> > don't
> >> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
> >> > way
> >> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> >> > that
> >> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
> >>
> >> I think both approaches are meaningful:
> >>
> >> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> >> used.
> >> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an
> option.
> >>
> >> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
> >
> > Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> > AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> >
> >>
> >> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> >> AbstractTransportListenerEx
> >
> > +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> >>
> >> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> >> transport was implemented).
> >>
> >> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> >> > patches.
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Hiranya
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> >> > Senior Software Engineer;
> >> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> >> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> >> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Andreas Veithen <andreas.veithen@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
> the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
> that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
> transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
> verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
> transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
>
Sure, I'll have a look.
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
> Andreas
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <
> hiranya911@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Folks,
> >> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
> >> > to
> >> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> >> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both
> the
> >> > TCP
> >> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> >> > checks
> >> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> >> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> >> > don't
> >> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
> >> > way
> >> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> >> > that
> >> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
> >>
> >> I think both approaches are meaningful:
> >>
> >> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> >> used.
> >> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an
> option.
> >>
> >> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
> >
> > Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> > AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> >
> >>
> >> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> >> AbstractTransportListenerEx
> >
> > +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> >>
> >> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> >> transport was implemented).
> >>
> >> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> >> > patches.
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Hiranya
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> >> > Senior Software Engineer;
> >> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> >> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> >> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Andreas Veithen <andreas.veithen@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
> the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
> that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
> transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
> verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
> transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
>
Sure, I'll have a look.
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
> Andreas
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <
> hiranya911@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Folks,
> >> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
> >> > to
> >> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> >> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both
> the
> >> > TCP
> >> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> >> > checks
> >> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> >> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> >> > don't
> >> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
> >> > way
> >> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> >> > that
> >> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
> >>
> >> I think both approaches are meaningful:
> >>
> >> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> >> used.
> >> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an
> option.
> >>
> >> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
> >
> > Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> > AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> >
> >>
> >> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> >> AbstractTransportListenerEx
> >
> > +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> >>
> >> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> >> transport was implemented).
> >>
> >> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> >> > patches.
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Hiranya
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> >> > Senior Software Engineer;
> >> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> >> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> >> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
Andreas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> > to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> > TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> > checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> > don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> > way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> > that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> > patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
Andreas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> > to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> > TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> > checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> > don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> > way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> > that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> > patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
Andreas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> > to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> > TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> > checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> > don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> > way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> > that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> > patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
>
Done - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4722
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
>
> thank you
> Martin Gainty
> ______________________________________________
> Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
>
> Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene
> Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte
> Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht
> dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine
> rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von
> E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
>
> Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
> Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
> From: hiranya911@gmail.com
> To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
>
>
> BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
> transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
> the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
> calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
> configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
> startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
> is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
> transport was configured at service level.
>
> I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hiranya911@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
> ------------------------------
> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> inbox. Learn more.<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
>
Done - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4722
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
>
> thank you
> Martin Gainty
> ______________________________________________
> Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
>
> Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene
> Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte
> Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht
> dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine
> rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von
> E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
>
> Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
> Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
> From: hiranya911@gmail.com
> To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
>
>
> BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
> transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
> the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
> calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
> configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
> startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
> is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
> transport was configured at service level.
>
> I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hiranya911@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
> ------------------------------
> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> inbox. Learn more.<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
>
Done - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4722
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
>
> thank you
> Martin Gainty
> ______________________________________________
> Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
>
> Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene
> Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte
> Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht
> dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine
> rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von
> E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
>
> Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
> Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
> From: hiranya911@gmail.com
> To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
>
>
> BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
> transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
> the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
> calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
> configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
> startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
> is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
> transport was configured at service level.
>
> I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hiranya911@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
> ------------------------------
> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> inbox. Learn more.<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
>
Done - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4722
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
>
> thank you
> Martin Gainty
> ______________________________________________
> Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
>
> Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene
> Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte
> Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht
> dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine
> rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von
> E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
>
> Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
> Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
> From: hiranya911@gmail.com
> To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
>
>
> BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
> transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
> the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
> calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
> configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
> startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
> is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
> transport was configured at service level.
>
> I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hiranya911@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
> ------------------------------
> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> inbox. Learn more.<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
>
Done - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4722
Thanks,
Hiranya
>
>
> thank you
> Martin Gainty
> ______________________________________________
> Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
>
> Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene
> Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte
> Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht
> dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine
> rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von
> E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
>
> Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
> Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
> From: hiranya911@gmail.com
> To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
>
>
> BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
> transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
> the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
> calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
> configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
> startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
> is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
> transport was configured at service level.
>
> I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hiranya911@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
> ------------------------------
> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> inbox. Learn more.<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
RE: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com>.
can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
thank you
Martin Gainty
______________________________________________
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
From: hiranya911@gmail.com
To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the AbstractTransportListenerEx.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
(which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
RE: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com>.
can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
thank you
Martin Gainty
______________________________________________
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
From: hiranya911@gmail.com
To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the AbstractTransportListenerEx.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
(which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
RE: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com>.
can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
thank you
Martin Gainty
______________________________________________
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
From: hiranya911@gmail.com
To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the AbstractTransportListenerEx.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
(which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
RE: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com>.
can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
thank you
Martin Gainty
______________________________________________
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
From: hiranya911@gmail.com
To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the AbstractTransportListenerEx.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
(which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
RE: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com>.
can you file JIRA with WSDL and axis2.xml to replicate problem?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2
thank you
Martin Gainty
______________________________________________
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 15:26:07 +0530
Subject: Re: Questions on TCP Transport
From: hiranya911@gmail.com
To: java-dev@axis.apache.org
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the AbstractTransportListenerEx.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
(which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka
<hi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka
<hi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka
<hi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
Andreas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> > to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> > TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> > checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> > don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> > way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> > that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> > patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
Maybe it would also make sense to merge the
AbstractTransportListenerEx code into AbstractTransportListener. In
the Axis2 transports projects there are currently no more transports
that extend AbstractTransportListener directly. However, IIRC, the FIX
transport in Synapse still extends AbstractTransportListener. Can you
verify that and check if it would make sense to refactor the FIX
transport to use AbstractTransportListenerEx?
Andreas
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:50, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> > to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> > TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> > checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> > don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> > way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> > that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> > patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka
<hi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
BTW I came across a problem in the UDP transport when configuring the
transport globally in axis2.xml. The problem is in
the AbstractDatagramTransportListener class. The init method of this class
calls the init method of the super class. If the transport is globally
configured the super class will call the startEndpoint method. The
startEndpoint method attempts to call methods on the dispatcher object which
is not yet initialized. This leads to a NPE. Things work smoothly if the
transport was configured at service level.
I think this is a bug that we should get fixed.
Thanks,
Hiranya
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hiranya Jayathilaka
<hi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen <
> andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Folks,
>> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able
>> to
>> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
>> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
>> TCP
>> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
>> checks
>> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
>> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
>> don't
>> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That
>> way
>> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
>> that
>> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>>
>> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>>
>> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
>> used.
>> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>>
>> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>>
>
> Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
> AbstractTransportListenerEx.
>
>
>> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
>> AbstractTransportListenerEx
>
>
> +1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
>
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
>
>> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
>> transport was implemented).
>>
>> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
>> patches.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Hiranya
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
>> > Senior Software Engineer;
>> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
>> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
>> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen
<an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen
<an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen
<an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen
<an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Andreas Veithen
<an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Folks,
> > I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> > get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> > 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the
> TCP
> > listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically
> checks
> > for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> > 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why
> don't
> > we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> > different services can have different server sockets. We can also use
> that
> > to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
>
> I think both approaches are meaningful:
>
> * One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is
> used.
> * One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
>
> Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
>
Yes. I see that the UDP transport supports both approaches via the
AbstractTransportListenerEx.
> Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
> AbstractTransportListenerEx
+1... I will invest some time into this in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Hiranya
> (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
> transport was implemented).
>
> > If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some
> patches.
> > Thanks,
> > Hiranya
> >
> > --
> > Hiranya Jayathilaka
> > Senior Software Engineer;
> > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> > E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> > Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>
>
--
Hiranya Jayathilaka
Senior Software Engineer;
WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
Re: Questions on TCP Transport
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:18, Hiranya Jayathilaka <hi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I was trying to get the TCP transport working with Synapse. I was able to
> get a simple scenario working but I have a couple of questions.
> 1. It seems in order to use the TCP listener, one should enable both the TCP
> listener and the sender in the axis2.xml. The TCPWorker specifically checks
> for this condition. Is this check really necessary?
> 2. The transport only allows one server socket for all services. Why don't
> we make it possible to configure the transport at service level? That way
> different services can have different server sockets. We can also use that
> to push non-SOAP messages into services using TCP.
I think both approaches are meaningful:
* One socket for all services is a good approach when WS-Addressing is used.
* One socket per service is required when WS-Addressing is not an option.
Note that AbstractTransportListenerEx nicely supports both options.
Probably it's time to refactor the TCP transport to use
AbstractTransportListenerEx (which didn't exist at the time the TCP
transport was implemented).
> If these improvements sound valid and acceptable I can provide some patches.
> Thanks,
> Hiranya
>
> --
> Hiranya Jayathilaka
> Senior Software Engineer;
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.org
> E-mail: hiranya@wso2.com; Mobile: +94 77 633 3491
> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org