On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 06:27 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Thilina,
> 
> i'd suggest you concentrate on cleaning up the code for MTOM and
> writing more test cases with actual assert statements while we
> research this a bit more.

You do agree with the principle of getting the faulty impl corrected,
right?

> for example 
> - there are so many while loops which don't check if there are any
> more characters in the stream
> - are u handling unsupposted media exception? are we throwing it. are
> we catching it? are we handling all the exceptions in the specs? are
> there test cases for it?
> - are we handling all the http status codes specified in mtom/xop specs?
> - why are we createing intermediate ByteArrayOutputstreams and putting
> things in them. what is going to happen if we get 1 GB attachment or
> 512 MB soap part? there should not be any intermediate storage
> especially of things that are likely to grow.

+1 for cleaning up the code.

> - was there any effort to at least architect the code so that we can
> add mime and SwA later when we get a chance?

A XOP message is supposed to be wire-compatible with SwA. Is that not
the case?

What did you mean by "mime"? 

> - Can we get rid of httptransportsender as we talked about earlier?
> and so on....

Not directly MTOM related .. in progress but slow week this week because
Ajith, Chathura and Eran are all at AC Europe.

Sanjiva.


Reply via email to