----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 5:19
PM
Subject: ClassMediator vs. mediators as
Axis2 services
Is the ClassMediator really needed?
In yesterdays IRC chat there
was some discussion about mediators being Axis2 services vs. the ClassMediator
which calls a Java class directly without going through an Axis engine. It was
said the ClassMediator is easier to use as you don't need a service xml and is
faster.
>>>>>>>>>
In Axis2 we just came up with that
new feature , where you can make Java class into Axis web service without
having services.xml , so ClassMediator is jus to do that I think we do
not need that , since Axis2 can support that
nicely.
>>>>>>>>>
Are these the only
reasons for having the ClassMediator? Wouldn't having Synapse auto-deploy to
Axis2 (as Glen suggested) fix the complexity problem, and if it really is so
slow going through an empty AxisEngine shouldn't we try to get the Axis2 guys
to fix that instead of us just not using Axis? Surely a pass through an empty
engine should just be a few empty loops and a bunch of if statements which
shouldn't add so much overhead?
>>>>>>>>>
I agree with you going through
empty engine will slow down the system , but you need some Axis2 functionality
like addressing support , to have that you need to use Aixs2 , else you need
to duplicate codes , simply need to write some other SOAP processing engine
(We can think that future if we really want that)
>>>>>>>>>
One thing this would
help with is with the addressing stuff. i don't really like having
<engage-addressing-in/> explicitly in the Synapse XML. Shouldn't Synapse
just know when addressing is required? If you have a Mediator the routes based
on a WSA header then if the mediator was an Axis2 service the addressing stuff
could be engaged automatically on the pass through the engine.
...ant
