On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Millies, Sebastian <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello there, > > > > I have a very basic question about local interfaces: > > does Tuscany require parameters passed over a local service interface to be > Serializable? > > > > Example: > > <sca:component name="mappingcache"> > > <sca:implementation.java > class="com.softwareag.ps.platform.mappingcomponent.impl.MappingCacheServiceImpl"/> > > <sca:service name="MappingCacheService"> > > <sca:interface.java > interface="com.softwareag.ps.platform.mappingcomponent.api.MappingCacheService"/> > > </sca:service> > > </sca:component> > > <sca:component name="mapping"> > > <sca:reference name="mappingCacheService" > target="mappingcache/MappingCacheService"/> > > </sca:component> > > > > The service “mappingcache/MappingCacheService” implicitly exposes > binding.sca and the service interface is not @Remotable. > > > > “Tuscany SCA in Action” says in section 2.5: “The default binding allows > vendors to provide optimized communication where > > interoperability isn’t required”. I believe this would be just such a case. > > > > Therefore I would assume that a service call from the mapping component over > the service reference “mappingCacheService” > > would simply involve Java reflection, without any > Serialization/Deserialization going on for any of the parameters in the > > methods exposed by the MappingCacheService interface . > > > > Is my assumption correct? If it is not, what would be the reason? > > > > -- Sebastian
Hi Sebastien Yes, for local services (services with local interfaces) local semantics should be in force, i.e. pass by reference. I would not expect parameter serialization to be taking place in this case. Do you observe something which makes you think that something else is going on? Regards Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
