1. return immediately
2. return after we send the message (or throw an exception if there's an error)
3. return after the server acknowledges receipt, but before calling the actual implementation
4. return when the implementation completes
3-4 are out of bounds for us since there has to be an ack protocol in place which no-one's defined (though we essentially do 4 right now). So we must choose between 1 and 2.
I prefer 2 (which is what Glen and Tom are advocating), though I realize that not everyone shares this view, which is why I wish some spec had already specified this.
Russell Butek
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Q about Call.invokeEngineOneWay()
I believe we should not just toss it off and hope for the best.
We should verify that we at least *sent* the message.
--
Tom Jordahl
-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Daniels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 1:47 PM
To: Axis-Dev (E-mail)
Subject: Q about Call.invokeEngineOneWay()
If we make a one-way call, as it stands there is really no way to notice that an error has occurred unless you look in the log (no exceptions are thrown).
Would it make sense to have the one-way invocation be synchronous up to the point that the transport sender does its thing - in other words, should we see exceptions if the message can't be sent for some reason? This could still be done with a thread, but we'd hold the main thread until the worker thread had successfully sent the message or registered an error...
Thoughts?
--G
