Paul
On 11/28/05, Rajith Attapattu <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul, so are you going to move forward and make a proposal on this??
Opinions so far seems to be clearly divided over the issue :)
I am wondering how much interest is there in investigating this issue
further???
How about the priority for this issue? (Low I assume)
Some comments would be very helpful
With Best Regards,
Rajith
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Jordahl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 9:13 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Axis2] Stub / Call
+1 to avoiding the whole Stub and thread safety issue.
+1 to stating clearly the limits in the JavaDoc!
--
Tom Jordahl
-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Daniels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 9:58 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Axis2] Stub / Call
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> we'd have to see some proposals on how to modify the current code
> generation and runtime to implement that :) If we go this route, We
> also have another fundamental issue, same Stub instance is supposed to
> be usable across multiple threads. (First of all, we need to review
> the code and make sure that this is still true in current impl). We
> also need to figure out how to "inject the call" such that this
> premise still holds good.
Who said the same Stub needs to be thread-safe? I don't think that's
true at all. We went through this in Axis1, and ended up deciding that
Stubs were per-thread after a long and problematic attempt to make them
sharable. I don't think we should put effort into making them
thread-safe.
--Glen
