On 11/7/2012 2:14 PM, Jan Algermissen wrote:
>
> On Nov 7, 2012, at 7:59 PM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 11/7/2012 11:50 AM, Jan Algermissen wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> do you have an estimate what the overhead of using an AsyncResponse is, if you send back a sync. response for the majority of cases?
>>>
>>> Use Case:
>>>
>>> Implement a resource method that retains the opportunity for handling a request asynchronously but decides thatonly when the method is actually invoked. IOW, when the method determines that a synchronous response is fine, it simply invokes the async response right away.
>>>
>>> Does that significanly affect performance or resource usage?
>>
>> I don't know. I could do a mini bench vs. JBoss Web Servlet container, but I"m too lazy.
>>
>> BTW, I have a similar use case that I've discussed before:
>>
>> @POST
>> void post(@Suspended AsyncResponse res) {
>>
>> res.resume(Response.status(202).build()); // 202, Accepted
>>
>> // do an expensive op.
>>
>> }
>>
>> In this case, the client gets a response immediately, while the server does something in the background. Really simple, no need for queues, threads, etc.
>
> Well, yes that is how you do async properly with HTTP :-)
>
Not according to Marek. He disliked this.
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com