Lists Home |
Date Index |
Jan Algermissen wrote:
> Michael Champion wrote:
>> On Apr 5, 2005 11:42 AM, Jan Algermissen
>> <email@example.com> wrote:
>> My point is to ask for evidence to support that assertion,
> scalability: you do not get caching possibilities with single-service+POST
Here's another scalability point:
By supporting GET I can more easily route users to different locations
based on, e.g. service level agreements or security credentials.
Take the earlier example of a POST to register a query, returning via
a 302, a location to GET the results.
For Jan, who has purchased fast access to my service I can return
URLs to myfastserver.example.com. Jan also gets a richer response with
For Mike, who is using the free service, I can use URLs on
slowserver.example.com. Mike gets a restricted view of the data.
Neither Mike or Jan has to code explicitly to account for this. Their
applications follow the redirect and subsequent links from that location.
I can decide to add such a system at a later date by deploying a
proxy server in front of my application that performs appropriate
rewrites to myfastserver or slowserver as appropriate.
Easy for me and for them.
There are no doubt ways to achieve this using SOAP+WSDL, but with
the above approach I can deploy some simple Apache scripts and I
like that simplicity.