wRESTling with REST

I'm still struggling with the decision to create a REST or traditional web service. Over the weekend I started reading RESTful Web Services and I'm now thinking that a RESTful approach is very doable. Here are my thoughts:
  • REST resources are inherently stateless and shareable. All the information needed to reconstruct the view of a resource exists in the URI. Although I listed this a a "pro" before reading the book, I'm more convinced of the benefits now.
  • I had a concern about long query criteria in the URI, but I'm thinking of adopting the Ruby-like approach of referring to ids. The RESTful authors prefer a more human readable URI (as it is self documenting), but many of my filter criteria cannot be accessed through unique strings.
  • I believe I was trying to do too much at the beginning (not keeping it simple). My object relationships are complex, with most objects linked to several related (non-subordinate) lists of objects. I wanted to have a single interface with options to include specific subsets of data as well as page through the results.

    As I thought more about this, I began to think that these subsets should actually be separate URI requests. Clients will probably make more requests to the service for data, but underneath, my Ruby controllers were making multiple requests to the database anyway. Here I'm hoping that the additional overhead of multiple GET requests will be balanced by the simplicity and usability of the interface (and no SOAP overhead).

As I become more familiar with the concepts of REST, I'm getting more comfortable thinking of my objects in terms of URIs and resources opposed to RPC calls and parameters. It's kind of similar to the shift in thought from procedural programming to object oriented design.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I Believe...

A recent reorg at my company left me with a new manager - and a different approach to software development than my team had been previously following.  Our new approach is one that I don’t necessarily agree with, but it led me to think about - and reevaluate -  those tenets of software development that I think are important and that I believe lead to increased quality and productivity. This post will consist of fairly high level discussions about how to organize code, teams, and projects - but contain very little actual code. Many of these ideas will not be my own.  They are mostly ideas I’ve learned from others and their willingness to share their experiences with me.  They are, however, ideas that I’ve practiced and hardened as I’ve worked to build my own ideal environment for delivering value through software . Many of these ideas I now take for granted as commonplace (even though they aren’t).  I felt a need to document them anyway - so people can understand what to expect (a
Read more

FRail :include

I really like developing with Rails, but I've been frustrated the last few days by some things Rails should do quite easily, yet doesn't. I've already written here and here about some of my struggles with Rails :include clause. Here's one more... Let's say you have a has-and-belongs-to-many relationship. If you :include this relationship in a find query, Rails will automatically create the join clause including the lookup table! That's cool. Unfortunately, it looks as if only the :include clause provides this piece of functionality. Why isn't the same functionality provided via the :join clause or through a general purpose module? This doesn't make any sense to me! I'm working on a database application where I don't need to display a lot of data, but the data displayed is heavily filtered by it's connections to other information in the database. I need to join a lot of tables to perform the filtering operation and using :include
Read more

Performance Tuning JCAPS - Part 2

It's been close to 2 months since my first Performance Tuning JCAPS post. Since then, we've noticed our servers running out of TCP connections under heavy load. Researching this problem, we learned that the JCAPS' JMS server makes heavy use of TCP in implementing Request/Reply queues . We approached Sun for guidance and they assured us that they've had success implementing high throughput applications using the JMS request reply solution... but how? It appears a multi-step solution is needed. First, running out of TCP connections in a scenario like ours is a JCAPS bug addressed in an ESR (110348) and rolled into JCAPS 5.1.3 Update Release 3 . We installed this update and noticed a marked improvement. Running my simple 75 user simulated test, transactions took 2521 ms to round trip (compared to the previous time of 20128ms). While this is great improvement, an average of 2.5 seconds is still really slow for this simple transaction. We reported our findings to Su
Read more