So if the WSDL for my method were as follows:
<wsdl:operation name="deleteEmployee">
<wsdl:input name="deleteEmployeeRequest"
message="impl:deleteEmployeeRequest"/>
<wsdl:output name="deleteEmployeeResponse"
message="impl:deleteEmployeeResponse"/>
</wsdl:operation>
then that's an indication that I'm using a synchronous request/response and
therefore my method itself does *not* need to return anything (even though
it might be advisable to do so, the question here is one of necessity).
From: "Chris Nappin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
To: <axis-user@ws.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Explicit response required from WS methods?
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:48:14 +0100
Have a look at the various scenarios in the WS-I Usage Scenarios spec
http://www.ws-i.org/SampleApplications/SupplyChainManagement/2003-12/Usa
geScenarios-1.01.pdf - (not as scary as it sounds).
If you care about whether the operation really happened, or you want to
be able to receive a fault if anything went wrong, then use the
synchronous request/response scenario.
If you don't care (known as a "fire and forget" message) then use the
"one way" scenario.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jarmo Doc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 August 2005 16:39
To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
Subject: Explicit response required from WS methods?
Let's say that I have a WS method like so:
deleteEmployee(int empid) throws SOAPException
{
}
Is it sensible for this method to have a void return type or should it
always return something, for example the empid just deleted (for client
correlation purposes, amongst other things)?
I ask because it's not clear to me what's going on under the covers. I
could imagine, for example, that void would be OK because any kind of
problem explicitly detected by the web service method would throw a
SOAPException and any kind of network issue (e.g. request not even
making it
to the web service) or a failure of the service to execute the method
might
cause the underlying infrastructure itself to throw a SOAPException
(because, for example, HTTP 200 OK was never seen by the client). So
the
absence of a SOAPException might reasonably imply success and hence no
return type was required.
Thanks.
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE
This e-mail is confidential to its intended recipient. It may also be
privileged. Neither the confidentiality nor any privilege attaching to this
e-mail is waived lost or destroyed by reason that it has been mistakenly
transmitted to a person or entity other than its intended recipient. If you
are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately by telephone or
fax at the numbers provided above or e-mail by Reply To Author and return
the printed e-mail to us by post at our expense. We believe, but do not
warrant, that this e-mail and any attachments are virus-free, but you
should check. We may monitor traffic data of both business and personal
e-mails. We are not liable for any opinions expressed by the sender where
this is a non-business e-mail. If you do not receive all the message, or if
you have difficulty with the transmission, please telephone us immediately.
_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
