On 4/18/08, Ramkumar R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/18/08, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Ramkumar R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> > TUSCANY 1881, talks about throwing a warning msg when adding remote >> > bindings >> > to services with interfaces not marked as remotable, by which the data >> > transformation might get messed up. >> > >> > From the current implementation, I understand that the >> datatransformation >> > interceptor will not be inserted in the invocation chain if the target >> > interface is not marked as remotable. Not having this interceptor will >> end >> > up with binding specific data transformations not being done.. So unless >> > the >> > target binding does have any trouble with the arguments and returntypes >> > because of the absence of transformations... we do not have any issues. >> > But >> > otherwise we might end up in runtime exceptions being thrown. >> > >> > While thinking at a solution to this issue, i could think of various >> > options >> > as shown below, but not sure which one is the right approach? >> > >> > OPTION 1: About issue shows how lack of Remotable ends up in runtime >> > exception when service methods are invoked, can't we somehow trap this >> > during component build or activatoin time itself? >> > >> > OPTION 2: I believe this whole thing can be solved if we can simply >> check >> > in >> > the binding if the interface is marked remote. >> > >> > OPTION 3: Currently DataBindingRuntimeWireProcessor.process() method >> > checks >> > if the source and target interfaces is remotable before it validates to >> > see >> > if data transformation is required. One way of solution to throw a >> warning >> > msg is to check the source and target datatypes, if their datatypes are >> > diff >> > we assume that data transformation is required and we look if the >> > interfaces >> > are marked remotable, if not we throw a warning msg to alert that there >> > could be an unexpected behaviour in data transformation. >> > >> > OPTION 4: In the DataBindingRuntimeWireProcessor.process() method, just >> > check if the source and target interface is remotable OR if the source >> and >> > target datatypes are different. If any one condition is satisfied then >> we >> > assume that data transformation is required. >> > >> > Apart from the above mentioned issue, do we need to make such checks for >> > ws >> > binding as well OR do we need this checks for all kind of bindings. Like >> > to >> > know people's view on this regard. Thanks. >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks & Regards, >> > Ramkumar Ramalingam >> > >> >> Hi Ramkumar >> >> When I originally raised the JIRA I had imagined the solution would be >> your >> OPTION 1. So that we get a warning that at least tells the user that they >> are doing something odd. In my case it took me a while to work out what >> the >> problem was so it would have been nice if the runtime had at least said >> "you >> are dong something strange are you sure you want to do this". >> >> I hadn't imagines that we could introduce a data transformation in this >> case. Is there code in there that tries and optimizes away the remote >> binding if it detects that the components are running locally? >> >> Simon >> > > Hi Simon, > I believe, we don't do any validatation to identify if the component is > local / remote. But anyway we assume that the component is remote by > checking if the interface is remotable. I could see that we only check if > the interfaces are remotable and we try to apply appropriate binding and > data transformation upon them. > > I agree with your idea of identifying the component as local/remote and do > some optimization on binding and data transformation part. If everyone > agrees that we need this in place we can probably think of taking this > suggestion forward. > > -- > Thanks & Regards, > Ramkumar Ramalingam >
Hi Simon, In the mean time, while leaving the optimization part. To fix the issue mentioned in TUSCANY-1881, i believe the best solution would be to identify at the bindingProvider level (except for binding.sca) to check if the source and target interface is remotable and throw a warning message as required. Hope this helps. -- Thanks & Regards, Ramkumar Ramalingam
