Sending data to a webservice

Solarion said:
Web services are so important and it's a vital too to have in your toolbox.
Click to expand...
Don't let SOAP ruin it for you.

But @kolaval is right when he says it is a prevalent protocol (the reason being very expensive legacy systems) so good to know it.
 
Cute, but your shitty queries take way more processing than the SOAP message.
 
Good Lord how I hate SOAP. The worst was way back I had to integrate to a service using SOAP. They did not have XSD nor WDSL. Only one sampke piece of SOAP request response. I had to jump though many hoops at the time to get it parsed. But that was not likely SOAP's fault per se.

Nowadays when clients need to integrate to my services and they use C#, at least I give them the assemble I use that contains all the DTOs. At least when they JSON serialize/deserialize they use the same classes as I do. Or use Swagger if using REST
 
kolaval said:
Cute, but your shitty queries take way more processing than the SOAP message.
Click to expand...

Well I've never heard of a SOAP fanboy before but here we are. Comparing SOAP processing to SQL processing is stupid.

And don't you judge my SQL queries until you've seen them guy.
 
Hardly a fanboy, just indifferent. When a customer(and I mean big companies) says "we need data, here's our wsdl" you don't respond with "herpes". It's irrelavant.

SOAP processing, SQL processing it's all CPU cycles at the end of the day.
And I have had to fix enough SELECT * to know where the server bottlenecks are.

Just
like
yours

guy.

:p
 
Spacerat said:
Good Lord how I hate SOAP. The worst was way back I had to integrate to a service using SOAP. They did not have XSD nor WDSL. Only one sampke piece of SOAP request response. I had to jump though many hoops at the time to get it parsed. But that was not likely SOAP's fault per se.

Nowadays when clients need to integrate to my services and they use C#, at least I give them the assemble I use that contains all the DTOs. At least when they JSON serialize/deserialize they use the same classes as I do. Or use Swagger if using REST
Click to expand...

My favourite SOAP services are the one that take a CDATA'd XML payload in the body.

The WSDL/XSD basically generates

XML: 
<SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
   <SOAP-ENV:Header/>
   <SOAP-ENV:Body>
      <Data>?</Data>
   </SOAP-ENV:Body>
</SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
 
Hamster said:
+1
Click to expand...
Ja. But if you shower yourself with soap afterwards, you should be fine. I read somewhere.

Whenever I have to integrate a solution, and there are multiple ways of making requests, soap typically doesn't even get a shoo in
 
kolaval said:
Hardly a fanboy, just indifferent. When a customer(and I mean big companies) says "we need data, here's our wsdl" you don't respond with "herpes". It's irrelavant.

SOAP processing, SQL processing it's all CPU cycles at the end of the day.
And I have had to fix enough SELECT * to know where the server bottlenecks are.

Just
like
yours

guy.

:p
Click to expand...

Yes, but there are more efficient data transport formats out there now. If you are developing a new service and still using SOAP you need to have a frontal lobotomy. For legacy systems entrenched with this I can understand.

SOAP process vs SQL processing are not even remotely the same thing, one is a transport format the other is a language designed for querying databases. Your comment regarding CPU cycles is entirely moot.
 
_kabal_ said:
My favourite SOAP services are the one that take a CDATA'd XML payload in the body.

The WSDL/XSD basically generates

XML: 
<SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
   <SOAP-ENV:Header/>
   <SOAP-ENV:Body>
      <Data>?</Data>
   </SOAP-ENV:Body>
</SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
Click to expand...

I very much agree: KISS
 
SOAP while awful is certainly not the worst of what's out there; and the fact that its prevalent in certain spaces is more a subject of timing rather than any specific good attribute.
 
I gather from the responses here that many have been burned by k@k SOAP.
Hence the hate.

But if you get a proper wsdl, coding against it is a piece of cake.
 
kolaval said:
I gather from the responses here that many have been burned by k@k SOAP.
Hence the hate.

But if you get a proper wsdl, coding against it is a piece of cake.
Click to expand...
It's got nothing to do with being burned by anything.
SOAP simply is an bad solution to every problem; it's neither light weight or fast or flexible or simple or...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X