Agree with Manuri and Madhawa. 202 Accepted is used in long running processes [1]. 204 is the better status code to say when there's no content body but the request is processed.
[1] http://farazdagi.com/blog/2014/rest-long-running-jobs/ On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Manuri Amaya Perera <[email protected]> wrote: > AFAIU 202 should not be sent when request is already processed. > [1] clearly states that 202 is for a situation like, "The request has been > accepted for processing, but the processing has not been completed. The > request might or might not eventually be acted upon, as it might be > disallowed when processing actually takes place. There is no facility for > re-sending a status code from an asynchronous operation such as this." > > So I think if the request is successfully fulfilled and there is no entity > body 204 should be sent. > > > [1] https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html > > Thanks, > Manuri > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Madhawa Gunasekara <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Niranjan, >> >> Yes, but the point is that, we can use accepted status code for the >> requests which has been accepted for processing, but the processing has not >> been completed [1]. This works for asynchronous requests. >> >> But when it comes synchronous requests, we send the response after >> processing is completed. so AFAIU, we can't use accepted status code for >> those kind of scenarios. >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html >> >> Thanks, >> Madhawa >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Niranjan Karunanandham < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Madhawa, >>> >>> AFAIK, even 202 can have with and without body. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Nira >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Madhawa Gunasekara <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> We set 202 (Accepted) status code for the response when there isn't >>>> content message body. but AFAIU We have to set 204 (No Content) for >>>> successful responses where there isn't a content message body [1]. >>>> >>>> This issue is reported in [2]. >>>> >>>> Highly appreciated your thoughts on this. >>>> >>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html >>>> [2] https://wso2.org/jira/browse/DS-886 >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Madhawa >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Madhawa Gunasekara* >>>> Software Engineer >>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com >>>> lean.enterprise.middleware >>>> >>>> mobile: +94 719411002 <+94+719411002> >>>> blog: *http://madhawa-gunasekara.blogspot.com >>>> <http://madhawa-gunasekara.blogspot.com>* >>>> linkedin: *http://lk.linkedin.com/in/mgunasekara >>>> <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/mgunasekara>* >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> *Niranjan Karunanandham* >>> Associate Technical Lead - WSO2 Inc. >>> WSO2 Inc.: http://www.wso2.com >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *Madhawa Gunasekara* >> Software Engineer >> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com >> lean.enterprise.middleware >> >> mobile: +94 719411002 <+94+719411002> >> blog: *http://madhawa-gunasekara.blogspot.com >> <http://madhawa-gunasekara.blogspot.com>* >> linkedin: *http://lk.linkedin.com/in/mgunasekara >> <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/mgunasekara>* >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >> >> > > > -- > > *Manuri Amaya Perera* > > *Software Engineer* > > *WSO2 Inc.* > > *Blog: http://manuriamayaperera.blogspot.com > <http://manuriamayaperera.blogspot.com>* > > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev > > -- Malintha Amarasinghe Software Engineer *WSO2, Inc. - lean | enterprise | middleware* http://wso2.com/ Mobile : +94 712383306
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
