Maybe using JAXB annotations on Java return objects, you can speed up the
process.

Bruno.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Martin Gerner <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm running a simple web service which receives a string from the
> client, processes it and returns an array of custom objects (nothing
> complicated, they're just data holders containing a few ints, strings
> and booleans). While the actual serverside processing performed by my
> server code is performed very fast, the response times from the server
> are very large and seem to be linear in the number of returned objects.
>
> A short example: if I send a string to the server which results in 0
> objects being returned, the response from the server is received just a
> few milliseconds after the request is made. If the string is modified
> such that it returns one object, that increases to 8 seconds, and if it
> returns two objects it increases to 16 seconds. In all cases, I can see
> that the actual processing takes less than a second, so the web service
> java code that I've deployed is handling the requests quickly.
>
> All responses are small in size - the largest is ~900 bytes (so I can't
> imagine that it's an XML transformation issue). Using packet sniffers, I
> can see that the delay definitely is occurring on the server side (for
> the last example, I could see the POST packet going to the server, and
> then the response packet coming back 16 seconds later). Going by client
> and server log timings, I can see that the delay occurs after processing
> rather than before.
>
> I'm running axis2 1.5.1 with default settings, have tested it running on
> both the bundled SimpleAxisServer and Tomcat (both on a Debian server)
> and am using a very simple client based on code auto-generated by axis
> from the WSDL (running in Windows).
>
> Does anybody here have any clue as to what's causing the delays? It
> seems clear enough that it's something in the internal axis2 system, but
> as I'm quite new to axis2 I'm having difficulties locating the issue.
>
> Best wishes,
> Martin Gerner
>

Reply via email to