RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-02-03 Thread Nirmal Mukhi
;Paul Andrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/31/2003 01:17 PM Please respond to axis-user                 To:        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>         cc:                 Subject:        RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface Yes. I can see how that would work. I'm not convinced that it's a

RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Markus Frommherz
see how that would work. I'm not convinced that it's a satisfactory solution in my case for scalability reasons: It requires a thread for each outstanding request/response pair. I guess you could use an internal thread pool to manage that but my hope is that if an asynchronous interface wer

RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Paul Andrews
> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 9:44 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface > > > Inline... > > Thanks, > Jaime > > > -Original Message- > > From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday

Re: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Steve Loughran
- Original Message - From: "Anne Thomas Manes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 06:30 Subject: RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface > There's a difference between an asynchronous API and an asynchronous > tran

RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Paul Andrews
Yes. I can see how that would work. I'm not convinced that it's a satisfactory solution in my case for scalability reasons: It requires a thread for each outstanding request/response pair. I guess you could use an internal thread pool to manage that but my hope is that if an asynchronous

RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Markus Frommherz
t: Friday, January 31, 2003 9:15 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Antw: Asynchronous interface > > > You might consider to check the advanced JMS (Java Message > Service) support in the 1.1 (cvs or nightly). Some folks reported > to get it running. > If you think of >

RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Jaime Meritt
Inline... Thanks, Jaime > -Original Message- > From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 9:31 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface > > There's a difference between an asynchrono

RE: Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Anne Thomas Manes
.html#ba sics.webServiceInvocation.asynchronous > -Original Message- > From: Markus Frommherz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 9:15 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Antw: Asynchronous interface > > > You might consider to check t

Antw: Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Markus Frommherz
You might consider to check the advanced JMS (Java Message Service) support in the 1.1 (cvs or nightly). Some folks reported to get it running. If you think of the onMessage-method, (experimentally) provided in the jwsdp from sun, this got not into a J2EE standard because of redundancy with JMS

Asynchronous interface

2003-01-31 Thread Paul Andrews
I've just read back through the archive of this mailing list and I notice that there was talk at the end of october of providing an asynchronous method invocation mechanism in Axis. I would be interested to hear how this is progressing. Thanks - Paul Andrews.