SimpleXMLRPCServer

[Yannick Turgeon]

I plan to use XML-RPC to communicate between my python server and VB client.
I just called a simple registered function (lambda x,y: x+y) and it worked.
But I'm new to XML-RPC and I'm now wondering why this class is called
"Simple". What are its limitations? I want to know if I can count on it for
my project or if I would need a not-so-simple XML-RPC server.

Yannick

[Istvan Albert]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

Yannick Turgeon wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Simple". What are its limitations?[/color]

No limitations whatsoever ... it is "Simple" to use

:-0

Istvan.

[Jeremy Jones]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

Istvan Albert wrote:
[color=blue]
> Yannick Turgeon wrote:
>[color=green]
>> "Simple". What are its limitations?[/color]
>
>
> No limitations whatsoever ... it is "Simple" to use
>
> :-0
>
> Istvan.
>[/color]
Simple indeed. I don't know for sure the reasons for naming it
"Simple". But it may have to do with the fact that the out-of-the-box
SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one request at a time: a request
comes in, the server accepts that request, blocking until the method
call returns, and the response is sent back to the client. It does not
spawn a thread per request. It does not "select" among multiple
requests. It will not create a thread pool for you. If you want that
added functionality, you can write a little custom code to get it to
spawn a thread per request. A little more code to only spawn n number
of threads. A little more code still to create a thread pool. And if
you want a server that "select"s among multiple requests, I'm not 100%
sure, but I bet Twisted has one of those.

But I've got a good bit of confidence in the "SimpleXMLRPCSe rver." I've
written a small modification to spawn a thread per request and am about
to write a test harness to pound my underlying library to pieces through
the slightly modified SimpleXMLRPCSer ver. I'm hopeful for good results
- at least in robustness if not performance.

HTH,

Jeremy

[PhysicsGenius]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

Jeremy Jones wrote:[color=blue]
> Istvan Albert wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Yannick Turgeon wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> "Simple". What are its limitations?[/color]
>>
>>
>>
>> No limitations whatsoever ... it is "Simple" to use
>>
>> :-0
>>
>> Istvan.
>>[/color]
> Simple indeed. I don't know for sure the reasons for naming it
> "Simple". But it may have to do with the fact that the out-of-the-box
> SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one request at a time: a request
> comes in, the server accepts that request, blocking until the method
> call returns, and the response is sent back to the client. It does not
> spawn a thread per request. It does not "select" among multiple
> requests. It will not create a thread pool for you. If you want that
> added functionality, you can write a little custom code to get it to
> spawn a thread per request. A little more code to only spawn n number
> of threads. A little more code still to create a thread pool. And if
> you want a server that "select"s among multiple requests, I'm not 100%
> sure, but I bet Twisted has one of those.[/color]

I have a non-threaded, select()ing SimpleXML-RPC
server. I have stressed it yet, but I have
verified that the concept works.

[Jeremy Jones]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

PhysicsGenius wrote:
[color=blue]
> Jeremy Jones wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Istvan Albert wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Yannick Turgeon wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Simple". What are its limitations?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No limitations whatsoever ... it is "Simple" to use
>>>
>>> :-0
>>>
>>> Istvan.
>>>[/color]
>> Simple indeed. I don't know for sure the reasons for naming it
>> "Simple". But it may have to do with the fact that the
>> out-of-the-box SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one request at a
>> time: a request comes in, the server accepts that request, blocking
>> until the method call returns, and the response is sent back to the
>> client. It does not spawn a thread per request. It does not
>> "select" among multiple requests. It will not create a thread pool
>> for you. If you want that added functionality, you can write a
>> little custom code to get it to spawn a thread per request. A little
>> more code to only spawn n number of threads. A little more code
>> still to create a thread pool. And if you want a server that
>> "select"s among multiple requests, I'm not 100% sure, but I bet
>> Twisted has one of those.[/color]
>
>
> I have a non-threaded, select()ing SimpleXML-RPC server. I have
> stressed it yet, but I have verified that the concept works.[/color]

Is this something that you wrote, or are you using Twisted? If it's
something you wrote, I'd love to see the code for it.

Jeremy

[Rembrandt Q Einstein]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

Jeremy Jones wrote:[color=blue]
> PhysicsGenius wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Jeremy Jones wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Istvan Albert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yannick Turgeon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Simple". What are its limitations?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No limitations whatsoever ... it is "Simple" to use
>>>>
>>>> :-0
>>>>
>>>> Istvan.
>>>>
>>> Simple indeed. I don't know for sure the reasons for naming it
>>> "Simple". But it may have to do with the fact that the
>>> out-of-the-box SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one request at a
>>> time: a request comes in, the server accepts that request, blocking
>>> until the method call returns, and the response is sent back to the
>>> client. It does not spawn a thread per request. It does not
>>> "select" among multiple requests. It will not create a thread pool
>>> for you. If you want that added functionality, you can write a
>>> little custom code to get it to spawn a thread per request. A little
>>> more code to only spawn n number of threads. A little more code
>>> still to create a thread pool. And if you want a server that
>>> "select"s among multiple requests, I'm not 100% sure, but I bet
>>> Twisted has one of those.[/color]
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a non-threaded, select()ing SimpleXML-RPC server. I have
>> stressed it yet, but I have verified that the concept works.[/color]
>
>
> Is this something that you wrote, or are you using Twisted? If it's
> something you wrote, I'd love to see the code for it.
>
> Jeremy
>[/color]

Maybe "server" is too grand a term. This is running inside an actual
server, but this is really just a snippet of code for doing select() on
an XML-RPC server socket.

server = XMLRPCServer.XM LRPCServer((ipA ddr, port), logRequests=Fal se)
while(True):
inputs, outputs, exceptions =
select.select([server.fileno() ,],[], [],
configOptions['tick'])
if inputs:
server.handle_r equest()

[Brian Quinlan]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

Jeremy Jones wrote:[color=blue]
> Istvan Albert wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Yannick Turgeon wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> "Simple". What are its limitations?[/color]
>>
>>
>>
>> No limitations whatsoever ... it is "Simple" to use
>>
>> :-0
>>
>> Istvan.
>>[/color]
> Simple indeed. I don't know for sure the reasons for naming it
> "Simple". But it may have to do with the fact that the out-of-the-box
> SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one request at a time: a request
> comes in, the server accepts that request, blocking until the method
> call returns, and the response is sent back to the client. It does not
> spawn a thread per request.[/color]

The name SimpleXMLRPCSer ver is in line with SimpleHTTPServe r: a simple
serial request handling server that can be subclassed to provide
additional functionality. I also chose SimpleXMLRPCSer ver because I
reasoned that some day someone would want to write a server using a
different technique and SimpleXMLRPCSer ver could be refactored into
BaseXMLRPCServe r and SimpleXMLRPCSer ver without breaking anything. That
would allow NewXMLRPCServer to leverage the new BaseXMLRPCServe r.

Cheers,
Brian

[Yannick Turgeon]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

"Jeremy Jones" <zanesdad@bells outh.net> wrote in message
news:mailman.39 83.1096327706.5 135.python-list@python.org ...[color=blue][color=green]
> > Yannick Turgeon wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> "Simple". What are its limitations?[/color]
> >[/color]
> Simple indeed. I don't know for sure the reasons for naming it
> "Simple". But it may have to do with the fact that the out-of-the-box
> SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one request at a time[/color]

Oh! Ok, that's good. Thanks.

Yannick

[Skip Montanaro]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver


Jeremy> ... the out-of-the-box SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one
Jeremy> request at a time... It does not spawn a thread per request.

Nor should it. Enabling threading in an application should be an active
step taken by the programmer, not a passive step taken as a side effect of
using a particular class that doesn't mention threading. The simplest part
of making a server threaded is mixing in SocketServer.Th readingMixin. Far
more work needs to be done to make it robust.

Now, should the SimpleXMLRPCSer ver module provide a threaded version?
Perhaps. The default should be non-threaded however.

Skip

[Jeremy Jones]

Re: SimpleXMLRPCSer ver

Skip Montanaro wrote:
[color=blue]
> Jeremy> ... the out-of-the-box SimpleXMLRPCSer ver will only handle one
> Jeremy> request at a time... It does not spawn a thread per request.
>
>Nor should it. Enabling threading in an application should be an active
>step taken by the programmer, not a passive step taken as a side effect of
>using a particular class that doesn't mention threading. The simplest part
>of making a server threaded is mixing in SocketServer.Th readingMixin. Far
>more work needs to be done to make it robust.
>
>Now, should the SimpleXMLRPCSer ver module provide a threaded version?
>Perhaps. The default should be non-threaded however.
>
>Skip
>
>[/color]
I don't disagree at all. The example that I got from somewhere that I
still use as my base template to create a threaded XMLRPCServer is all
of 6 lines of code. It's trivial. And that could probably be trimmed
down a bit.


Jeremy