:
> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 2:09 PM
> Subject: Re: Adding phase-based ordering support for invokers/interceptors
> in the InvocationChain
>
>
> > Raymond Feng wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> As of today, we can add multiple interceptors to the invocation chain,
>
Please see my comments below.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: Adding phase-based ordering support for invokers/interceptors
in the InvocationChain
Raymond Feng wrote:
[snip]
As of today, we can add multiple interceptors to the invocation chain,
but we cannot control their ordering.
Is that a problem?
When more policies are supported,
I see a need to provide some simple ordering mechnisim for interceptors.
[snip]
Do you have a specific
Please see my comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: "Venkata Krishnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:37 AM
Subject: Re: Adding phase-based ordering support for invokers/interceptors
in the InvocationChain
+1
On Jan 30, 2008 6:33 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As of today, we can add multiple interceptors to the invocation chain, but
> we cannot control their ordering. When more policies are supported, I see
> a
> need to provide some simple ordering mechnisim for interceptors.
>
+1 for mechanism to facilitate ordering of interceptors. Also am wondering
if it would be good for each interceptor to know the ones that have been
invoked ahead of it and the ones that would be invoke after it. This will
help us with some optimizations in cases such as when there is
PassByValueI
Hi,
As of today, we can add multiple interceptors to the invocation chain, but
we cannot control their ordering. When more policies are supported, I see a
need to provide some simple ordering mechnisim for interceptors.
SCA invocation may have three stages: reference, service and implementati
