One more note for now: it's harder than I had hoped to be selective about validation, due to the modularity of Spring. I haven't given up yet.
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Benson Margulies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The validation in question is of spring configuration files. It occurs, > first and foremost, as part of Bus initialization on both server and client. > It's the user's cxf.xml plus all the included files, and/or the invisible > process of loading a series of Spring XML files to set up the default bus. > The identifier spring.validation.mode was apparently invented by us, at > least as far as a quick google would indicate. > > From my point of view, it takes CXF a surprisingly long time to start up, > and so moving all validation from on by default to off by default appeals to > me. Documentation would seem to be an important aspect. > > However, if no one disagrees with your preference to leave validation in > general on by default but turn it off for our internal files, then I'll very > cheerfully do that. > > > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 5:48 AM, Glen Mazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I don't know the full story here--is this validation occurring for web > > services or SOAP clients--which one is your main concern? Also, is this > > validation occurring for *every* web service request (client side) or > > *each* web service processing (service side)--or just once? Also, which > > config files are you speaking of--just the main cxf.xml one used for the > > bus? > > > > I suspect we do not need to be validating our own static configuration > > files (if any), but validating their config files would appear to make > > sense--this is something they can turn off if it performance is a > > problem for them. For newbies, I think is is better to have validation > > over performance, even if it is not immediately obvious to the newbie > > how to optimize performance. > > > > Also, is this "spring.validation.mode" property a Spring default name > > (i.e., those working with Spring usually know about it)? Then perhaps > > it would be best to keep using that property name. Just as the benefits > > of working with Maven is that all projects run alike, a similar argument > > can be made for configuring Spring-based applications. > > > > Regards, > > Glen > > > > Am Donnerstag, den 13.03.2008, 03:54 -0400 schrieb Benson Margulies: > > > This message is an outgrowth of my performance investigations. > > > > > > We are (still?) validating spring XML files by default, at high cost. > > > > > > We control validation with a system property with a name that doesn't > > say > > > 'cxf' in it anywhere. > > > > > > I could submit the following change: > > > > > > 1) Add the name org.apache.cxf.spring.validation.mode as a > > (compatible) > > > replacement for spring.validation.mode. > > > > > > 2) Treat the default as 'none'. > > > > > > Or, I could make the BusApplicationContext force validation off when > > reading > > > any file with a pathname beginning with META-INF:/cxf (e.g., one of > > ours), > > > so that users still get validation by default. > > > > > > Please send along thoughts. > > > > >
