blocks|key|172657|text|构建RESTful+web；然后使用其他方法(SOAP、XML等)可以获得许多自动缓存等好处。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|172658|有关更多细节，请参见这个职位|offset|length|172659|另一个好处是，如果您构建了一个供您的代码使用的RESTful+API，您可能也可以让您的用户利用它--他们通常对您的产品有您从未想过的用途。|172660|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|https://stackoverflow.com/questions/106546/performance-of-soap-vs-xml-rpc-or-rest#106701^0|0|A|4|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@$D|R|E|S|1|T]]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$J|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|O]]]]

Build RESTful web APIs; then you get a lot of automatic caching and etc benefits that you don't get if you use other methods (SOAP, XML-RPC, etc)

See <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/106546/performance-of-soap-vs-xml-rpc-or-rest#106701">this post</a> for more details

Another benefit is that if you build a RESTful API for your code to use, you can potentially let your users take advantage of it too - they often have uses for your product that you never dreamed of.

blocks|key|172628|text|W3C定义的“”意味着使用。SOAP在大多数情况下都是严重的过度消耗；只有当您向世界提供公共服务时才是真正合适的(IMO)，比如一个用于与您的网站交互的API。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|172629|其他任何东西(特别是内部的、私有的通信)很少需要比XML更复杂的东西。只有当性能是一个问题时，您才应该考虑一个更精简的协议；XML是如此简单且受广泛支持，开发和调试的容易程度超过了使用臃肿的ol‘XML所造成的性能损失。|172630|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

"Web Services" as defined by the W3C means using SOAP over HTTP. SOAP is severe overkill in most cases; it's only really appropriate (IMO) when you're making a public service available to the world, like an API for interacting with your website, for example.

Anything else (especially internal, private communications) rarely need anything more complex than XML-RPC. Only if performance is an issue should you consider a more condensed protocol; XML-RPC is so simple and widely-supported that the ease of development and debugging more than makes up for the performance loss of using bloaty ol' XML.

blocks|key|1171770|text|请记住，有许多框架使得编程web服务变得非常琐碎。在VB+/+C#世界里，.Net把它变成了joy。我不太确定其他语言的具体框架，但我确信大多数语言至少有一个框架。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1171771|web服务的实现和重用的标准化和简单性使它们非常有吸引力。正如前面所指出的-是的，它们使通信非常冗长。如果您担心这一点，为什么不计算一下您实际将发送多少数据。就目前的网络和互联网速度而言，即使有XML开销，这也可能是微不足道的。|1171772|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Remember that there are a number of frameworks out there that make programming web services very trivial stuff. In the VB / C# world .Net makes it a joy. I'm not really sure about specific frameworks for other languages but I am sure most have at least one.

The standardisation and simplicity of implementation and reuse of web services make them very attractive. As previously pointed out- yes, they make communications very verbose. If you are worried about this why not calculate how much data you actually will be trasmitting. chances are, with current network and internet speeds, it will be trivial - even with the XML overhead.

blocks|key|853115|text|我总是使用自定义数据格式作为最后手段，而不是第一次。广泛使用的方法由您自己决定，但Web服务模型不太可能出错。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|853116|可维护性和可扩展性是主要的好处。使用广泛使用的技术--您的解决方案将更容易被其他人理解--此外，您还可以使用ready库作为消费者和提供者。|offset|length|853117|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/examples/grid/edit-grid.html|1|http://www.xfront.com/REST-Web-Services.html^0|0|1Q|3|0|1U|3|1|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@$D|R|E|S|1|T]|$D|U|E|V|1|W]]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$H|$5|I|J|K|A|$L|M]]|N|$5|I|J|K|A|$L|O]]]]

I would always use the custom data formats as a last resort and not a first. What widely used method you use it up to you but it's unlikely you would go wrong with Web Services model.

Maintainability and extensibility are the main benefits. The use of widely used technology your solution will be easier for someone else to understand plus you can use ready to roll libraries as <a href="http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/examples/grid/edit-grid.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">consumers</a> and <a href="http://www.xfront.com/REST-Web-Services.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer" title="This is really an abstract of REST, but gives you a good quick intro to how web services could work well">providers</a>.

blocks|key|853016|text|我最近打破了我的习惯。我现在使用服务器端的Apache和libCurl+%2B+libxml2在客户机上加载和解析XML，这是用C%2B%2B编写的。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|853017|服务器端可以是PHP，也可以是用更严肃的语言编写的CGI。这取决于你想做什么。|853018|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

I have recently broken my custom protocol habit. I am now using Apache on the server side and libCurl plus libxml2 to load and parse the XML on the client which is written in C++.

The server side can be either PHP or a CGI written in a more serious language. Depends what you want to do.

blocks|key|172527|text|Webservices的优点是有些标准，所以您从未听说过的程序可以使用您编写的webservice。使用HTTP可以帮助他们通过代理和其他网络障碍进行通信，而无需您做任何额外的工作。XML虽然冗长且丑陋，但在调试时比二进制数据更容易阅读。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|172528|当您在网络上传输内容时，序列化/反序列化到xml不太可能成为性能的限制因素。这可能有点麻烦，尽管一个图书馆为你做它会有很大帮助。|172529|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Webservices have the advantage of being somewhat standard, so it's possible for programs you've never heard of to use a webservice you wrote. Using HTTP can help them communicate over proxies and other network obstacles without any extra work from you. The XML, although rather verbose and ugly, is rather easier to read when debugging than binary data.

When you're transferring stuff over the network, it's unlikely that serialisation/deserialisation to xml will be the limiting factor in performance. It can be a bit of hassle, although a library to do it for you will help a lot.

blocks|key|172597|text|在我个人(老脾气暴躁的家伙)看来，web服务只应被用作向第三方(即其他公司、组织以外的人等)提供一些内部信息的一种方式。当然，这也是XML最初的目的。:-)|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|172598|如果您可以访问包含应用程序所需信息的数据库的直接连接，这就是方法。它更快、更简单--在应用程序开发中，这意味着“更好”和“更少buggy”。|172599|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

In my personal (old cranky dude) opinion, web services should only be used as a way to make some of your internal information available to third parties (i.e. other companies, people outside your organization etc.). Of course, that is also the originally intended purpose of XML. :-)

If you have access to a direct connection with the databases containing the information your application needs - that is the way to go. It's faster and simpler - which in application development means "better" and "less buggy".

blocks|key|1171826|text|SOAP和XML+--“所有这些XML所包含的功能太少了，让我怀疑它是否值得这么做。”|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1171827|完全是这样。SOAP很重，而且--在很大程度上--解决了整个Java技术栈中静态绑定的需要。|1171828|另一方面，休息的重量要轻得多。此外，使用JSON的REST或使用YAML的REST非常轻量级，而且很容易实现。它就建立在现成的HTTP协议之上。|1171829|REST要求您根据规范的CRUD规则(GET、POST、PUT和DELETE)定义资源(通过URI命名)和事务。非常简单和规范。|1171830|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$]]

SOAP and XML -- "all that XML surround so little functionality makes me wonder if it's worth the trouble."

Totally. SOAP is heavy-weight, and -- to a large extent -- a workaround to the need for static binding throughout the Java technology stack.

REST, on the other hand, is much lighter weight. Further, REST with JSON or REST with YAML is very lightweight, and very easy to implement. It builds right on top of the off-the shelf HTTP protocol.

REST requires you to define resources (named via URI's), and transactions based on the canonical CRUD rules (GET, POST, PUT and DELETE). Very simple and canonical.

I have no experience with web services. Historically I've built client-server systems using proprietary communication protocols (even they happen to be XML). I just spent a few hours looking over Axis2 and it sent a shudder down my spine. The learning curve of WS scares me, and seeing all that XML surround so little functionality makes me wonder if it's worth the trouble.

How do you decide whether you need to use Web Services or a custom communication protocol? What are the advantages/disadvantages of each approach and what use-cases are they best suited for?

Please post a clear guideline, not an opinion piece :)

Web Services or Custom Protocol?

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

教程

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云智能顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

EdgeOne AI 安全实战专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

聚焦“写作效率、视觉美观与运行性能”三方面进行全面升级，为您提供更高效、稳定的创作环境

社区富文本&Markdown编辑器全新改版上线，欢迎大家体验!

诚挚邀请您参与本次调研，分享您的真实使用感受与建议。您的反馈至关重要，感谢您的支持与参与！

社区新版编辑器体验调研

我没有使用web服务的经验。历史上，我使用专有通信协议构建了客户机-服务器系统(即使它们恰好是XML)。我只是花了几个小时查看Axis2，它使我的脊背颤抖。WS的学习曲线让我感到害怕，看到XML几乎没有什么功能，我想知道这是否值得一试。如何决定是否需要使用Web服务或自定义通信协议？每种方法的优点/缺点是什么，它们最适合什么用例？

问Web服务还是自定义协议？
EN

回答 8

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问Web服务还是自定义协议？EN

回答 8

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问Web服务还是自定义协议？
EN