• To: The Deviants <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Generality of HTTP
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:21:38 -0500
• In-reply-to: <3C4EED33.2D770FE2@p...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0201231348000.11412-100000@l...> <3C4EED33.2D770FE2@p...>

On Wednesday 23 January 2002 12:04 pm, Paul Prescod wrote:
> We aren't implementing DNS. Doesn't it seem a little odd to post
> about the inefficiency of TCP to an *XML* mailing list? Where is the
> inefficiency of a SOAP call really going to come from?

For fine-grained synchronous calls, a lot of the overhead *is* in 
TCP/HTTP. As I said before, the performance characteristics of SOAP 
over HTTP are such that it skews you away from these kinds of 
applications, which people *are* building, and the systems built this 
way are failing the test of least surprise. I should note that SOAP 
over UDP also suffers vs. binary RPC over UDP.

There are a lot of situations where SOAP over HTTP is fine. It's not a 
panacea though, and REST assured, REST isn't perfect for everything 
either.

People mistake generality for general applicability far too often...

• References:
  • Re: Generality of HTTP
    • From: Al Snell <alaric@a...>
  • Re: Generality of HTTP
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Strategies for a lowly XML document
• Next by Date: RE: Better is better
• Previous by thread: Re: Generality of HTTP
• Next by thread: RE: Generality of HTTP
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread