[SAGA-RG] SAGA Message API Extension

[Andre Merzky]

Hi Steven, 

I found: "In WS-Notification, a message type is represented
by an XML Schema global element definition."  I did not find
such an explicit statement for the othe WS definitions, but
I think the same holds there.

I am not sure if that would exclude large binary messages,
but it certainly would make that more difficult. Yes, you
can encode them, and include even larger ascii messages
then, but that would be inefficient.

So I think the mechanisms used in WS-Notification and
WS-ReliableMessaging are VERY compatible to the SAGA message
API, but the target use cases differ, and it is possible to
implement the SAGA message API on top of the WS-standards,
but that may be not optimal in terms of performance.

OTOH, for use cases with less strict requirements (smaller
message footprint, XML messages, no latency limits), the API
and the WS-specs seem definitely compatible.

Cheers, Andre.


Quoting [Andre Merzky] (Feb 20 2007):
> From: Andre Merzky <andre at merzky.net>
> To: Steven Newhouse <s.newhouse at omii.ac.uk>
> Cc: Andre Merzky <andre at merzky.net>, SAGA RG <saga-rg at ogf.org>
> Subject: Re: [SAGA-RG] SAGA Message API Extension
> 
> Hi Steven, 
> 
> Quoting [Steven Newhouse] (Jan 19 2007):
> > 
> > Andre,
> > 
> > Where does this messaging API sit with things such as WS-Notification or 
> > WS-Eventing and WS-Relaibility or WS-ReliabaleMessaging. Can these 
> > underpin the API?
> 
> In terms of notification and event management I'd say: yes,
> that is compatible to WS-Notification, WS-Eventing and
> WS-Relaibility.  I don't think though that all reliability
> and ordering modes can be supported with those (have to
> recheck, in respect to the latest discussion and changes).
> 
> I do not think though that the API would be implemented with
> these, as it focuses on large messages (think megabyte or
> more) of binary data.  I think thats not the target usage
> scenario for the WS-protocols.  Or am I missing something?
> 
> I must admit I don't know a thing about
> WS-ReliabaleMessaging, really - will check as soon as I am
> back online.  I suspect though that the same answer holds.
> (I don't know much about the other three too, really, so
> will re-check them, too ;-)
> 
> Thanks for the hint!
> 
> Cheers, Andre.
-- 
"So much time, so little to do..."  -- Garfield