I'm not quite as against the idea as Glen is. I'm more "indifferent"
as long as performance is completely not impacted.
Also, it's more of an InterceptorChainListener as that would be the
one calling the methods and the listener is really listening to what
the PhaseInterceptorChain is doing. Thus, with that in mind, you
probably would need to add methods like
void interceptorAdded(Interceptor)
void interceptorRemoved(...)
void exceptionCaught(Throwable)
etc....
My major concern is adding a bunch more method calls on the intercepor
chain path an what impact might that have on performance.
I'm actually wondering if it might make more sense to make the
creation of the PhaseInterceptorChain objects somehow more pluggable
and allow subclasses or something that could do that. The default
would be our normal implementation, but you could plugin a different
LoggingPhaseInterceptorChain or something that could perform worse.
That said, creating the chains via a factory or something could have
just as much of a performance impact or something. Not really sure.
I might need to think about this some more though and could easily be
convinced one way or another.
Dan
On May 6, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Bharath Ganesh wrote:
I was thinking of a way to register listeners with CXF interceptors.
The use
case I ran into was:
I wanted some timing diagnostics to determine the time certain
interceptors
were taking to process the message. Ideally I would register a
TimingListener with such interceptors. Another use case can be some
custom
logging before and after each interceptor.
Listener can be as simple as-
public interface InterceptorListener
{
void preHandleMessage(Interceptor interceptor);
void postHandleMessage(Interceptor interceptor);
void preHandleFault(Interceptor interceptor);
void postHandleFault(Interceptor interceptor);
}
How about building such a feature into the Interceptor framework? Any
thoughts?
Daniel Kulp
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.dankulp.com/blog
