Doug, How many times has this happened? Can you please send links to discussions on any archives? Was there a VOTE taken?
thanks, dims --- Doug Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Tom, > The attitude I was referring to was post-1.0 and I usually only pop up > like this when Axis' behavior changes (read into that: breaks my product) - > so IMO changing it so I can get 1.0 behavior back is justified. But that's > ok - I'm used to having to having my own version of Axis.... :-) > So... if you're ok with it, increase it to 5 hours and be done with it - > but I still would like to know why Axis believe it knows better than a > normal socket connection at what the "default" timeout should be. > -Dug > > > Tom Jordahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/14/2003 12:09:24 PM > > Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: > Subject: RE: read timeout > > > Dug wrote: > > I've been told several times from axis-dev'ers that all changes made > > were necessary because it was just wrong in the past - and if > > breaks current users - (pardon my french) screw 'em (backwards > > compatibility isn't even considered). > > In fairness, most of this attitude was during the pre-1.0 development > cycle, when Axis did not have a stake in the ground *at all*. > > With 1.1 and beyond, I believe everyone is very much in agreement that we > can not change public APIs that affect backwards compatibility. > > Now fixing broken *behaviors* to be correct is goodness and I don't believe > you are saying that. > > What we have is a disagreement about whether this behavior is broken by > timing out at all by default. > > I would consider increasing the timeout, but I am against reversing the > change to default to no timeout. > > -- > Tom Jordahl > Macromedia Server Development > > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 11:17 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: read timeout > > > > > > > I can't help but laugh. I agree with you that its annoying when products > keep changing stuff that people use - but when looking at the history of > Axis, "change" is Axis' middle name :-) I've been told several times > from axis-dev'ers that all changes made were necessary because it was just > wrong in the past - and if breaks current users - (pardon my french) screw > 'em (backwards compatibility isn't even considered). Well, in the big list > of changes that go into Axis this doesn't break APIs it just makes life > easier for Axis developers/users - to me its an easy choice. "stuck > with..." is such a relative phrase :-) > > To the others who responded saying that "zero" is just wrong ;-) I see > the problems you've described as perfect reasons why the APIs need to be > defined to allow you to change it - and if the client hangs because the > client never got back a response and the socket is still open then (imo) it > should be the responsibility of the client application to set an > appropriate timeout. Having axis guess at what the appropriate default > should be is just inviting the pains 'some' of us are seeing. One way I > look at it is this - why would Axis' default timeout be any less than the > normal socket.read() or HTTPURLConnection timeout? (those are zero aren't > they? not sure) > > -Dug > > > "Kellogg, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/14/2003 10:58:10 AM > > Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: > Subject: RE: read timeout > > > I actually tend to agree with Doug. A timeout of zero would have been > preferable but we have already shipped Axis 1.1. Therefore we are stuck > with the timeout of 60 seconds. I personally hate it when products keep > changing their minds on things like this. > > My vote is to leave it at 60 seconds. > > Rick > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 10:53 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: read timeout > > > > > > > > As you indicated, the value you pick will never make everyone happy. The > best you can hope for is to make sure that there are sufficient APIs such > that people who use the DIIs, stubbies or whatever can get access to that > setting easily. Personally, I think Axis should default to "0" (no > timeout) because by default I would want the system to be as > lenient/tolerant as possible - and if someone is running in an environment > that requires stricter controls they can set it as such - picking any value > other than zero give preference to whatever machine/environment the axis > developer who wrote that line of code happens to be using at that moment. > -Dug > > > Tom Jordahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/14/2003 10:35:55 AM > > Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: > Subject: RE: read timeout > > > > For the record, I hard coded this default and it wasn't a mistake. :-) I > asked for feedback at the time the change was made and I believe I got > consensus that 60 seconds was reasonable. > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18277 > > What would be a better default? 2 minutes? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? (ack!) > > Speaking as someone who embeds Axis in a multi-threaded, request serving, > application server, 60 second timeouts are about all we would tolerate > unless the user asks for longer. I understand that my use case may be > different from non-user interactive, 'background' processing. > > -- > Tom Jordahl > Macromedia Server Development > > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 12:39 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: read timeout > > > > > > > Yup - as soon as I sent my note I noticed it in MessageContext too. I > agree, it sure seems like a mistake to me. > -Dug > > > Thomas Sandholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/12/2003 12:31:03 AM > > Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > cc: > Subject: Re: read timeout > > > Yes for some reason a 60sec socket read timeout is hardcoded in the > MessageContext class. I think this is a mistake personally, and it has > caused our users a lot of problems too. The default timeout should at least > > be configurable without having to change the timeout property on every stub > > you are calling as the FAQ > http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?AxisProjectPages/JavaTimeout > explains. > We ended up writing a handler that allows you to set a system property to > change the default timeout. > /Thomas > At 08:51 PM 7/11/2003 -0600, Doug Davis wrote: > > > > > > >Since Axis 1.1 rc2 something changed that is causing my requests that take > >a long time (over say 3 minutes) to complete to timeout with: > >java.io.InterruptedIOException: Read timed out > === message truncated === ===== Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
