On 2/5/2013 1:53 PM, Marek Potociar wrote:
> I was under impression that leakage is implementation detail. We did not have to specify anything for sync case, why should we specify it for async case. There's nothing special about async case in this regard.
>
In he sync case, the Servlet container is wrapping the JAX-RS
invocation. So, exceptions can be propagated and handled by the servlet
container if need be. In the async case, a non-servlet thread is
handling the response. So, cleanup, exception handling, etc. needs to
either be handled by the jax-rs layer, or user code. IMO, cleanup and
exception handling should be done in the JAX-RS layer and should be as
deterministic.
> That said, I'm fine with adding a short sentence to the AR.resume()/cancel() javadoc stating that "A successful invocation of this method eventually completes the suspended request processing." or similar. FWIW, I do not want to write anything like "when this method completes, the request processing is complete", because I do not want to place restrictions on implementations. E.g. implementors may decide to complete the response processing asynchronously, which means that when the method returns the connection does not have to be necessarily closed yet. Which is also why I think it's better to not say anything...
>
Yeah, that's ok. If you want to force synchronicity, then you can just
do it in the callback layer. It just wasn't very clear in the javadoc
what was supposed to happen with unmapped exceptions. In the sync
layer, the unmapped exception is rethrown. You just can't do that in
the async layer, IMO.
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com