Asankha As a post 1.0 we need to be able to read the WSDL definition and use that. In the meantime, I suggest we add an explicit marker to endpoint to indicate not to expect a response.
I don't go for the none approach.... it seems counter-intuitive to me. That seems to be telling the target what to do, not Synapse. Paul On 3/14/07, Asankha C. Perera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Gerald > Has anyone successfully used JMSSender for one-way messages? > > My set-up is really simple: > ----------------------- > <proxy name="proxy" transports="http"> > <target endpoint="jms_endpoint" /> > <wsdl key="wsdl_with_one_way_op" /> > </proxy> > ----------------------- > > The only special thing is that the operation defined in the WSDL and > invoked by the client is one-way (an in-only MEP). The problem here is that you do not define to Synapse which operation to invoke with the WSDL, or if its IN only or IN-OUT. I guess we could specify this within the endpoint definition, or maybe even set the replyTo header to none to indicate that the message is not expecting a reply? > I experience that a one-way message (to an in-only MEP) that is sent > to a JMS destination via JMSSender causes JMSSender to wait for a > response message on a reply > queue. Of course this does not make sense, and indeed the blocking JMS > receive of that reply message ultimately times out with this error: > > ----------------------- > DEBUG [13 Mar 20:33:13] JMSSender - JMSSender invoke() > DEBUG [13 Mar 20:33:13] JMSSender - [Client]Sending message to > destination : TOPIC.T_INT_CLIENT_EVT > DEBUG [13 Mar 20:33:13] JMSSender - Waiting for a maximum of 30000ms > for a response message to destination : QUEUE.JMS_TQ3 > WARN [13 Mar 20:33:43] JMSSender - Did not receive a JMS response > within 30000 ms to destination : TOPIC.T_INT_CLIENT_EVT > ----------------------- > > Very briefly looking at the code for > org.apache.axis2.transport.jms.JMSSender in the trunk it indeed seems > that JMSSender sets the flag "waitForResponse" to true regardless of > whether the messages is one-way (to an in-only MEP) or not. > > Can anybody confirm my understanding of the behaviour of JMSSender? Yes, you are correct. It is time we updated the JMS transport with the current open issues. asankha --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
