No, I don't want to implement SAAJ. I was just suggesting that we right
a SAAJ builder which uses StAX as it would be faster that way.
- Dan
James Mao wrote:
Do u mean that we are going to implement by ourself? and replace the
current SAAJ impl?
I think it's ok as along as the api is same.
The provider/dispatch used the SAAJ, because the api do require us the
support SOAPMessage.
Wondering if it'll be a good idea to have this as a separate project?
so other projects may use your high performance SAAJ impl.
Cheers,
James.
Dan Diephouse 写道:
Dan Diephouse wrote:
I know there was some discussion about implementing SAAJ mode - has
anyone started on that yet or were we just talkin about it? :-)
Cheers,
- Dan
OK, since no one responded, I'd like to suggest that we construct the
SAAJ document from the xmlstreamreader. A couple reasons for this:
First, I think SAAJ uses SAX underneath and Woodstox is way faster
than xerces (median of 2-3x faster from tests I've seen), so we
should get a performance benefit. Second, it'd be easy to lazy load
the Body this way. What do people think?
- Dan
--
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions
http://envoisolutions.com
http://netzooid.com/blog
