I get it.  We have avoided "boxcaring" for this first version, we came up
with the same questions as you.  

One of the thing we did to help us out on the performance side is passing
array of things.  If the operation fails for one object the whole
transaction fail.  

This being said the complexity of doing boxcaring reside in the returned
informations.  The more powerfull the request the more complex is the
response, this added complexity on the WS consumer was not something we
though was worth it for now.

Sylvain.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 10:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Design guidelines for web service interfaces?


Doing web service design obviously you have to consider the trade-off
between coarse versus fine grained methods and the number of roundtrips.

We, for example, implemented a relative small number of methods which return
large amounts of data (with the possibility to filter) in order to reduce
the number of roundtrips to the server. This works in general fine.

However doing so you can run into problems with errors. What if one of the
parts of the data returned fails. Does the whole function generate an
exception? Or is the part that cannot be returned empty? etc.

Stephan



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ronald H�tter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 10:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Design guidelines for web service interfaces?
> 
> 
> Does anybody know about some guidelines on how to design web
> service interfaces? I'm facing a couple of problems when
> translating object oriented interfaces into traditional
> RPCs.
> Thanks, Ronald
> 

This message may contain privileged and/or confidential information.  If you
have received this e-mail in error or are not the intended recipient, you
may not use, copy, disseminate or distribute it; do not open any
attachments, delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender
promptly by e-mail that you have done so.  Thank you.

Reply via email to