Glynn, Eoghan wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Diephouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 October 2006 18:06
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: stacktrace in fault?
James Mao wrote:
I'm thinking of adding a getStackTrace()/setStackTrace into Fault I
saw in XML binding we just set the stacktrace into the message, i
don't think that is correct way.
Any idea?
-james.
I don't think we should be sending the stack trace along with
the fault.
We should log the stack trace on the server side and send
information to the client that there was some error
processing, but shouldn't necessarily tell them all the details.
- Dan
I'd disagree. In certain circumstances, I think sending on the wire the
stack trace of the exception that gave rise to the fault would actually
be very useful for debugging and problem reporting. It could lead to
much quicker resolution of issues reported by client-side developers, as
opposed to trawling thru' (potentially very large) server-side logs.
I'd see this as analogous to the CORBA ExceptionDetailMessage service
context, which is often used by Java ORBs to marshall the offending
stack trace into the exception reply. As the content of the stack trace
may be deemed "sensitive", say in the case of a secure server, this
facility can usually be turned off via configuration.
/Eoghan
I would be happy with a configuration switch :-)
- Dan
--
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions
http://envoisolutions.com
http://netzooid.com/blog
