Announcement Announcement Module
No announcement yet.
UriEndpointMapping Vs PayloadRootAnnotationMapping Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
Conversation Detail Module
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • UriEndpointMapping Vs PayloadRootAnnotationMapping

    In one of the older threads i read that for larger XML payloads, using the payload mapping style could be a bit of a performance issue since it involves parsing the xml to determine the endpoint which will handle the request

    Spring 1.5 has introduced the UriEndpointMapping. Would it be faster than the payload mapping style?How does it work?

    Has anyone run any performance numbers yet?


  • #2
    If you're using the axiom msg factory, I doubt use of any of the payload root endpoint mappers (qname or annotation) would be much of a perf hit even with big payloads. I say that because the soap headers will have already been parsed by axiom, and efficiently peeking at what the root payload element is without parsing the rest is part of what axiom buys you.


    • #3
      URIEndpointMapping Vs PayloadRoot Style

      i am using SAAJMesssageFactory.

      But can you confirm my understanding on Axiom vs Saaj a bit

      Saaj uses DOM API's on incoming soap request , builds headers and body and dispatches to endpoint.The flow reverses for response

      Axiom directly reads from the input stream (using Stax) to construct the soap headers and body and dispatches to endpoint. On the return path however it uses SAX.

      But, i cannot use Axiom if i intend to use XWSSSecurityInterceptor because it depends on SAAJ.What else do i loose if i use Axiom? I am aware of the performance gains but i am getting into a pro/con mode here.

      Anyway going back to my original question , i thought the intent of introducing URIEndpointMapping was to get some performance benifits because a URL based dispatch would be faster than a payload root style based dispatch.I was hoping somebody could confirm/reject my observation