Hi all,
Managing the deployed web services is becoming mandatory and important,
because the usage of web services is increasing in the enterprise. One
requirement which can arise in managing the web services is to monitor the
availability of the services and to check the status of the services wh
Sameera,
Why should we extend the API? Is it not possible to do this with a
custom ping module with appropriate handlers?
thanks,
dims
On 2/6/07, Sameera Madushan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
Managing the deployed web services is becoming mandatory and important,
because the usage of we
Hi Sameera ;
> Hi all,
>
> Managing the deployed web services is becoming mandatory and
> important, because the usage of web services is increasing in the
> enterprise. One requirement which can arise in managing the web
> services is to monitor the availability of the services and to check
> the
Hi Dims, Deepal
Actually the idea is to develop a custom ping module with appropriate
handlers. One of the ping handlers should be added to the dispatch phase
before the 'InstanceDispatcher' (Inflow). If the service is deployed and it
is active, then ping handler can get the service status from
A
> Hi Dims, Deepal
>
> Actually the idea is to develop a custom ping module with appropriate
> handlers. One of the ping handlers should be added to the dispatch
> phase before the 'InstanceDispatcher' (Inflow). If the service is
> deployed and it is active, then ping handler can get the service
>
Sameera,
We've implemented ws-trust/ws-secconv/ws-rm w/o needing to extend the
API. So please take it out of the equation.
thanks,
dims
On 2/7/07, Deepal Jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Dims, Deepal
>
> Actually the idea is to develop a custom ping module with appropriate
> handler
The ping response is a best effort. The default is to say "it reached
the msg receiver so all is ok." Obviously that's not always true- e.g.,
class load errors can occur after that. (Or imagine the service is
implemented by a BPEL script- one of the external services may be
missing.)
So a given me
I think i'd like to see a patch before we go further. Am not convinced
this is the best approach. We could do a custom dispatcher that could
insert a java dynamic proxy[1] under certain conditions (custom soap
header?) to get the same kind of behavior.
Thanks,
dims
[1] http://java.sun.com/j2se/1
+1
This is a capability my clients have often wanted. I'm not sure I see
the need to do it at the MessageReceiver level, though. The approach
I've thought about is to use handlers. The handlers could not only
respond to a ping, but could also supply useful information about the
actual state o
Yuck! We have a clean fix why not do it?
Anyway, +1 for a patch.
Sanjiva.
On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 21:35 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> I think i'd like to see a patch before we go further. Am not convinced
> this is the best approach. We could do a custom dispatcher that could
> insert a java dy
Sorry, IMHO, changing the interface is not my definition of "clean fix".
-- dims
On 2/8/07, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yuck! We have a clean fix why not do it?
Anyway, +1 for a patch.
Sanjiva.
On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 21:35 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> I think i'd like t
On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 16:35 +1300, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> +1
>
> This is a capability my clients have often wanted. I'm not sure I see
> the need to do it at the MessageReceiver level, though. The approach
> I've thought about is to use handlers. The handlers could not only
The problem is th
Hi all,
Here are the sample message formats for the ping request and ping response.
Ping Request
POST /axis2/services/SomeService HTTP/1.1
SOAPAction: "ping" //SOAPAction should be a unique one
..
http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/";>
http://ping";>
Hi All;
>
>The problem is that pinging at the handler level basically amounts to
>just asking "is there such a service?". Having it go to the message
>receiver allows the ping to be responded to based on more useful data-
>such as did the impl class or script or whatever load etc.. So its
>really
Hi deepal,
>The problem is that pinging at the handler level basically amounts to
>just asking "is there such a service?". Having it go to the message
>receiver allows the ping to be responded to based on more useful data-
>such as did the impl class or script or whatever load etc.. So its
>rea
Hi Sameera ;
>
>
> There can be two types of ping requests.
>
> 1. Service level ping requests.
> 2. Operation level ping requests.
>
> In the first case, you are correct, we need to ping all the operations
> within the service. Then in the ping response simply we can say
> whether the service is
Hi Sameera ;
>
>
> There can be two types of ping requests.
>
> 1. Service level ping requests.
> 2. Operation level ping requests.
>
> In the first case, you are correct, we need to ping all the operations
> within the service. Then in the ping response simply we can say
> whether the service is
On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 11:54 +0530, Deepal Jayasinghe wrote:
> Service might have more than one MRs (most of the time it does) so
> checking only one MR wont give you the accurate results. The other
> problem I have is which MR you are going to call when you receive a ping
> request , are you going
Hi all,
a service in the Axis2 may not even have any implementation class. It
is very difficult to get any value out of the pinging in terms of
reaching a message receiver. The best and most guaranteed way to check
the status of a service is to actually invoke it with a request, which
is known to
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 16:35 +1300, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
+1
This is a capability my clients have often wanted. I'm not sure I see
the need to do it at the MessageReceiver level, though. The approach
I've thought about is to use handlers. The handlers could not o
Angel Todorov wrote:
...
What Dennis suggests is useful, but in reaility there may be
situations where the service is randomly invoked by clients with
crappy soap header / body (think about bots & worms or developers of
web service clients in an open WS environment), to which a fault is
produc
So how about a handler approach, with an optional interface that MRs
can implement if they do support being interrogated about current
status?
David
On 09/02/07, Dennis Sosnoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Angel Todorov wrote:
> ...
>
> What Dennis suggests is useful, but in reaility there may b
Dennis
Only if the user actually implements the ping-handling code themselves,
and checks the various conditions that can go wrong in the operation of
the service code. Was that the intention, that this be exposed to the
user to implement? I don't know see offhand how this would work, given
that
Paul Fremantle wrote:
Dennis
Only if the user actually implements the ping-handling code themselves,
and checks the various conditions that can go wrong in the operation of
the service code. Was that the intention, that this be exposed to the
user to implement? I don't know see offhand how this
Sounds good to me! +1
On 2/9/07, Dennis Sosnoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Fremantle wrote:
> Dennis
>> Only if the user actually implements the ping-handling code themselves,
>> and checks the various conditions that can go wrong in the operation of
>> the service code. Was that the inten
It'd be
easy enough to do this as an interface, though. So the message receiver
could check if the service class implements the pingable interface, and
if so it calls the method defined by that interface. Otherwise, it just
checks that it can create an instance of the service class.
That seems li
> easy enough to do this as an interface, though. So the message receiver
> could check if the service class implements the pingable interface, and
> if so it calls the method defined by that interface. Otherwise, it just
> checks that it can create an instance of the service class.
Seems like w
lease respond to
axis-dev@ws.apache.org
To
axis-dev@ws.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: [axis2] Pinging capability to services deployed in Axs2
So how about a handler approach, with an optional interface that MRs
can implement if they do support being interrogated about current
status?
David
s.apache.org
To
axis-dev@ws.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: [axis2] Pinging capability to services deployed in Axs2
> > easy enough to do this as an interface, though. So the message
receiver
> > could check if the service class implements the pingable interface,
and
> > if so i
olas Gallardo
WebSphere - WebServices Development
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 512-838-1182
Building: 901 / 5G-016
"Thilina Gunarathne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
02/09/2007 07:16 AM
Please respond to
axis-dev@ws.apache.org
To axis-dev@ws.apache.org
cc
Subject Re: [axis2] Pinging
On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 09:30 +, Paul Fremantle wrote:
>
> Ideally we could also generate a ping() method on skeletons that would
> encourage users to write a more thorough test. We could use reflection
> to invoke it if it exists.
Absolutely; that's what I thought we'd be doing too- generate a
M
Please respond to
axis-dev@ws.apache.org
To
axis-dev@ws.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: [axis2] Pinging capability to services deployed in Axs2
Nick,
Yes, a separate interface is what we are rallying around now...
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=axis-dev&m=117101637929286&w=2
On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:19 +1300, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>
> I really dislike using reflection for this type of thing, since it means
There's no reflection involved .. the generate MR would have the right
code in it.
> that "magic" methods change the behavior of things at runtime. It'd be
> e
On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 09:47 -0600, Nicholas L Gallardo wrote:
>
> I'm -1 on a change to the actual MessageReceiver interface. That
> would require that we implement these semantics for JAX-WS services
> that may not implement the Pingable interface.
We don't *have to* implement them .. the defa
Thilina Gunarathne wrote:
> easy enough to do this as an interface, though. So the message
receiver
> could check if the service class implements the pingable interface,
and
> if so it calls the method defined by that interface. Otherwise, it
just
> checks that it can create an instance of the
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
Are you in agreement with Thilina's point: we need to add a ping()
method to MR which would in turn interrogate the service class (at least
for Java class implemented services .. obviously it does squat for a
service implemented as bpel script or javascript or somethin
Hi all,
I'm especially unclear about how this would work at the individual
operation level, which was also part of what was discussed. My memory is
that there's (normally?) just one message receiver per MEP. So if the
intent is to offer a per-operation ping, I suppose you could pass the
operation
Thilina Gunarathne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> 02/09/2007 07:16 AM
>
> Please respond to
> axis-dev@ws.apache.org
>
>
> To axis-dev@ws.apache.org
>
> cc
>
>
> Subject Re: [axis2] Pinging capability to services deployed in Axs2
>
>
>
>
&g
In my experience the individual operations of a service generally use
the same backend functions. This generally means that either all
operations are working properly, or nothing of any significance is
working properly. It's possible to do things differently, grouping a
bunch of unrelated funct
Even to find out whether the service as a whole is working, you need to
be able to ping down to at least one MR. I'm fine with the ping module
having a property that users can set that allows users to control which
operations' MR's to contact. Something like
a b c
We can also have "*" as a specia
It still seems like overkill to me, but if people really want the
operation-based ping then sure, this sounds fine.
I don't think ping is going to be a module, though. If the
implementation uses a method added to the MR classes, as we've been
discussing, I'd think the functionality would be co
I agree with Dennis. I think operation-level ping is adding complexity
for no great benefit. The service level ping seems perfect.
Paul
On 2/11/07, Dennis Sosnoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It still seems like overkill to me, but if people really want the
operation-based ping then sure, this s
OK can you tell me how you'd implement service level ping?? Take the
following cases:
- service implemented by a java class
- service implemented by javascript
Assume that in both cases the services have a flaw .. say class can't be
loaded and script has an error. The question is what "ping" gives
The discussed approach was that the default message receiver
implementation first loads the service class instance to make sure it
loads properly. It next checks if the service class implements a
Pingable interface. If the service class *does* implement the interface,
the message receiver calls
I'm confused Dennis .. are you *for* changing the message receiver
interface to have a ping() method? If not, how does the message receiver
receive the ping request?
Wait, are you suggesting that we modify the AbstractMessageReceiver
class to have this behavior built-in?
Sanjiva.
On Mon, 2007-0
I'd personally support changing the message receiver interface to add a
ping() method, with the AbstractMessageReceiver class implementing it as
discussed. The reason is that I see this as something that should be a
mandatory part of the framework. But with the -1 from Nicholas Gallardo
on this
On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 13:32 +1300, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> I'd personally support changing the message receiver interface to add a
> ping() method, with the AbstractMessageReceiver class implementing it as
> discussed. The reason is that I see this as something that should be a
> mandatory part
I have an on going prototype development of the ping module, but it is
not yet submitted as a patch. It satisfies following requirements as
they were discussed in this thread.
The ping module supports only the service level ping requests. Once a
service level ping request is received, it will inv
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 13:32 +1300, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
I'd personally support changing the message receiver interface to add a
ping() method, with the AbstractMessageReceiver class implementing it as
discussed. The reason is that I see this as something that sho
Sorry for jumping in the middle. but I have a few questions, just to get my
self upto speed with the issue.
If I have understood correctly the difference btw an operation level and
service level ping is that.
If the service class or the script is loading properly then a service level
ping is dee
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>OK can you tell me how you'd implement service level ping?? Take the
>following cases:
>- service implemented by a java class
>- service implemented by javascript
>
>
In the case of JS , I think the MR need to handle whatever necessary.
Thanks
Deepal
51 matches
Mail list logo
