|
List Info
Thread: Question about factory pattern
|
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-04-30 19:14:07 |
|
Hi,
This question have previously been asked but I didn't get a reply, so I try again.
When communicating with a factory/instance pair of WSRF Web Services, a
client first creates a new resource using the factory service. The EPR
returned to the client is used to identify the resource, which can be
reached using the instance service. This requires that the client place
a header element in the request soap envelope.
The factory service is a singleton service, so it doesn't need a
resource identifier in the header element. The problem is that it seems
to me that the factory service still needs a header element to be
present.
When using libraries used for vanilla web services, this makes it
harder to use the factory service. The compulsory header element is not
described in the WSDL file for the factory service (or can this be
done?), so the client has no way to determine that the factory need a
header element. This makes it necessary to implent a client on a lower
level, making sure that the header is there.
So, are there any way to either disable the requirement of a header
element for the factor service, or alternatively, is there a way to
describe in the wsdl file for the factory that a header element is
necessary?
Friendly regards,
Jan Christian Bryne
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-01 13:45:03 |
|
| The required header is actually for the resource instance
itself...The only way around this is to make you resource a
singleton.....
We could define some arbitrary attribute in the wsdl file
to denote this, however the spec does not outline
this...
Hi,
This question have previously been asked
but I didn't get a reply, so I try again.
When communicating with a
factory/instance pair of WSRF Web Services, a client first creates a new
resource using the factory service. The EPR returned to the client is used to
identify the resource, which can be reached using the instance service. This
requires that the client place a header element in the request soap
envelope.
The factory service is a singleton service, so it doesn't need
a resource identifier in the header element. The problem is that it seems to me
that the factory service still needs a header element to be present.
When
using libraries used for vanilla web services, this makes it harder to use the
factory service. The compulsory header element is not described in the WSDL file
for the factory service (or can this be done?), so the client has no way to
determine that the factory need a header element. This makes it necessary to
implent a client on a lower level, making sure that the header is
there.
So, are there any way to either disable the requirement of a
header element for the factor service, or alternatively, is there a way to
describe in the wsdl file for the factory that a header element is
necessary?
Friendly regards,
Jan Christian Bryne
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-01 18:27:47 |
Hi,
Thanks for you reply.
My job is to make a web service interface to a bioinformatic
tool
(blast). I have looked at the interop example in CVS and
made a
interface following the factory/instance pattern.
Everything works fine, and I'm really grateful for the
Apache WSRF
implementation. However, I can not send requests to the
factory
service without a header element. When I remove it, I get an
error
message. It doesn't seem to matter what is inside the
header, as long
as it is present!
The factory service is in fact a singleton service, and so
does not
need the header. But the Apache WSRF still requires it to be
there. To
me this seems like unnecessary complexity, and the service
would be
better without.
So, is there any way to implement a singleton factory
service that
does not need the header element using Apache WSRF, or have
I missed a
very important point?
Friendly regards,
Jan Christian Bryne
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr., Salvatore J <sal.campana hp.com> wrote:
>
> The required header is actually for the resource
instance itself...The only
> way around this is to make you resource a
singleton.....
>
> We could define some arbitrary attribute in the wsdl
file to denote this,
> however the spec does not outline this...
>
> ________________________________
> From: jan.christian.brynegmail.com
[mailto:jan.christian.brynegmail.com]
> On Behalf Of Jan Christian Bryne
> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 3:14 PM
> To: wsrf-userws.apache.org
> Subject: Question about factory pattern
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> This question have previously been asked but I didn't
get a reply, so I try
> again.
>
> When communicating with a factory/instance pair of WSRF
Web Services, a
> client first creates a new resource using the factory
service. The EPR
> returned to the client is used to identify the
resource, which can be
> reached using the instance service. This requires that
the client place a
> header element in the request soap envelope.
>
> The factory service is a singleton service, so it
doesn't need a resource
> identifier in the header element. The problem is that
it seems to me that
> the factory service still needs a header element to be
present.
>
> When using libraries used for vanilla web services,
this makes it harder to
> use the factory service. The compulsory header element
is not described in
> the WSDL file for the factory service (or can this be
done?), so the client
> has no way to determine that the factory need a header
element. This makes
> it necessary to implent a client on a lower level,
making sure that the
> header is there.
>
> So, are there any way to either disable the requirement
of a header element
> for the factor service, or alternatively, is there a
way to describe in the
> wsdl file for the factory that a header element is
necessary?
>
> Friendly regards,
>
> Jan Christian Bryne
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-01 18:41:21 |
Hmmm...
So wait, you've implemented a Factory Service...You said
you did it as a
singleton...
Did you configure that in the config file, to make it an
actual
singleton service?
-----Original Message-----
From: jan.christian.brynegmail.com
[mailto:jan.christian.brynegmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan
Christian Bryne
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 2:28 PM
To: wsrf-userws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question about factory pattern
Hi,
Thanks for you reply.
My job is to make a web service interface to a bioinformatic
tool
(blast). I have looked at the interop example in CVS and
made a
interface following the factory/instance pattern.
Everything works fine, and I'm really grateful for the
Apache WSRF
implementation. However, I can not send requests to the
factory service
without a header element. When I remove it, I get an error
message. It
doesn't seem to matter what is inside the header, as long
as it is
present!
The factory service is in fact a singleton service, and so
does not need
the header. But the Apache WSRF still requires it to be
there. To me
this seems like unnecessary complexity, and the service
would be better
without.
So, is there any way to implement a singleton factory
service that does
not need the header element using Apache WSRF, or have I
missed a very
important point?
Friendly regards,
Jan Christian Bryne
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr., Salvatore J <sal.campanahp.com> wrote:
>
> The required header is actually for the resource
instance itself...The
> only way around this is to make you resource a
singleton.....
>
> We could define some arbitrary attribute in the wsdl
file to denote
> this, however the spec does not outline this...
>
> ________________________________
> From: jan.christian.brynegmail.com
> [mailto:jan.christian.brynegmail.com]
> On Behalf Of Jan Christian Bryne
> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 3:14 PM
> To: wsrf-userws.apache.org
> Subject: Question about factory pattern
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> This question have previously been asked but I didn't
get a reply, so
> I try again.
>
> When communicating with a factory/instance pair of WSRF
Web Services,
> a client first creates a new resource using the factory
service. The
> EPR returned to the client is used to identify the
resource, which can
> be reached using the instance service. This requires
that the client
> place a header element in the request soap envelope.
>
> The factory service is a singleton service, so it
doesn't need a
> resource identifier in the header element. The problem
is that it
> seems to me that the factory service still needs a
header element to
be present.
>
> When using libraries used for vanilla web services,
this makes it
> harder to use the factory service. The compulsory
header element is
> not described in the WSDL file for the factory service
(or can this be
> done?), so the client has no way to determine that the
factory need a
> header element. This makes it necessary to implent a
client on a lower
> level, making sure that the header is there.
>
> So, are there any way to either disable the requirement
of a header
> element for the factor service, or alternatively, is
there a way to
> describe in the wsdl file for the factory that a header
element is
necessary?
>
> Friendly regards,
>
> Jan Christian Bryne
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-02 06:32:50 |
|
Yes, the factory service is a singleton. Here is it's <bean> element in wsrf-config.xml:
<bean abstract="false" autowire="default"
class="no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryHome"
dependency-check="default" id="NCBI<bean abstract="false"
autowire="default";
class="no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryHome"
dependency-check="default" id="NCBIBlastFactoryHome" init-method="init"
lazy-init="default" singleton="true">
; <property name=";portComponentName">
<value>NCBI_BlastFactory</value>;
</property>
<property name=";serviceClass">;
<value>no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryService</value>
</property>
<property name=";resourceClass">
; <value>no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryResource</value>
</property>
</bean>
So making the factory service to not expect a resource identifier was
easy. But how can I make it to not expect a header element at all?
- Christian
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr., Salvatore J <hp.com">sal.campanahp.com>; wrote:
Hmmm...
So wait, you've implemented a Factory Service...You said you did it as a
singleton...
Did you configure that in the config file, to make it an actual
singleton service?
-----Original Message-----
From: gmail.com">jan.christian.brynegmail.com
[mailto:gmail.com">jan.christian.brynegmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan Christian Bryne
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 2:28 PM
To: ws.apache.org">wsrf-userws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question about factory pattern
Hi,
Thanks for you reply.
My job is to make a web service interface to a bioinformatic tool
(blast). I have looked at the interop example in CVS and made a
interface following the factory/instance pattern.
Everything works fine, and I'm really grateful for the Apache WSRF
implementation. However, I can not send requests to the factory service
without a header element. When I remove it, I get an error message. It
doesn't seem to matter what is inside the header, as long as it is
present!
The factory service is in fact a singleton service, and so does not need
the header. But the Apache WSRF still requires it to be there. To me
this seems like unnecessary complexity, and the service would be better
without.
So, is there any way to implement a singleton factory service that does
not need the header element using Apache WSRF, or have I missed a very
important point?
Friendly regards,
Jan Christian Bryne
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr., Salvatore J <hp.com">
sal.campanahp.com>; wrote:
>;
> The required header is actually for the resource instance itself...The
> only way around this is to make you resource a singleton.....
>
> We could define some arbitrary attribute in the wsdl file to denote
> this, however the spec does not outline this...
>
> ________________________________
>; From: gmail.com">jan.christian.brynegmail.com
> [mailto:gmail.com">
jan.christian.brynegmail.com]
> On Behalf Of Jan Christian Bryne
> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 3:14 PM
> To: ws.apache.org">wsrf-userws.apache.org
> Subject: Question about factory pattern
>
>
>
>
>;
> Hi,
>
> This question have previously been asked but I didn't get a reply, so
> I try again.
>;
> When communicating with a factory/instance pair of WSRF Web Services,
> a client first creates a new resource using the factory service. The
> EPR returned to the client is used to identify the resource, which can
> be reached using the instance service. This requires that the client
> place a header element in the request soap envelope.
>
> The factory service is a singleton service, so it doesn't need a
> resource identifier in the header element. The problem is that it
> seems to me that the factory service still needs a header element to
be present.
>
> When using libraries used for vanilla web services, this makes it
> harder to use the factory service. The compulsory header element is
> not described in the WSDL file for the factory service (or can this be
> done?), so the client has no way to determine that the factory need a
> header element. This makes it necessary to implent a client on a lower
>; level, making sure that the header is there.
>
> So, are there any way to either disable the requirement of a header
>; element for the factor service, or alternatively, is there a way to
> describe in the wsdl file for the factory that a header element is
necessary?
>
> Friendly regards,
>
> Jan Christian Bryne
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ws.apache.org">
wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-02 14:05:27 |
|
| Do you get a stack trace? I want to determine if it
is Axis expecting the header or if it is a certain class of ours which
is...
thx!
Yes, the factory service is a singleton. Here is it's <bean>
element in wsrf-config.xml:
<;bean abstract="false" autowire="default"
class="no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryHome"
dependency-check="default" id="NCBI<bean abstract="false" autowire="default"
class="no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryHome"
dependency-check="default" id="NCBIBlastFactoryHome" init-method="init"
lazy-init="default" singleton="true">
; <property
name="portComponentName">
<value>NCBI_BlastFactory</value>
</property>
<property
name="serviceClass">
;
<value>no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryService</value>
</property>
<property
name="resourceClass">
;
<value>no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryResource</value>
</property>
</bean>
So making the factory service to
not expect a resource identifier was easy. But how can I make it to not expect a
header element at all?
- Christian
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr.,
Salvatore J <hp.com">sal.campanahp.com>; wrote:
Hmmm...
So
wait, you've implemented a Factory Service...You said you did it as
a
singleton...
Did you configure that in the config file, to make it
an actual
singleton service?
-----Original Message-----
From: gmail.com">jan.christian.brynegmail.com
[mailto:gmail.com">jan.christian.brynegmail.com]
On Behalf Of Jan Christian Bryne
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 2:28 PM
To:
ws.apache.org">wsrf-userws.apache.org
Subject:
Re: Question about factory pattern
Hi,
Thanks for you
reply.
My job is to make a web service interface to a bioinformatic tool
(blast). I have looked at the interop example in CVS and made
a
interface following the factory/instance pattern.
Everything works
fine, and I'm really grateful for the Apache WSRF
implementation. However,
I can not send requests to the factory service
without a header element.
When I remove it, I get an error message. It
doesn't seem to matter what is
inside the header, as long as it is
present!
The factory service is
in fact a singleton service, and so does not need
the header. But the
Apache WSRF still requires it to be there. To me
this seems like
unnecessary complexity, and the service would be better
without.
So,
is there any way to implement a singleton factory service that does
not
need the header element using Apache WSRF, or have I missed a
very
important point?
Friendly regards,
Jan Christian
Bryne
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr., Salvatore J <hp.com"> sal.campanahp.com>;
wrote:
>;
> The required header is actually for the resource
instance itself...The
> only way around this is to make you resource
a singleton.....
>
> We could define some arbitrary attribute in
the wsdl file to denote
> this, however the spec does not outline
this...
>
> ________________________________
>; From:
gmail.com">jan.christian.brynegmail.com
>
[mailto:gmail.com">
jan.christian.brynegmail.com]
> On Behalf Of Jan Christian
Bryne
> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 3:14 PM
> To: ws.apache.org">wsrf-userws.apache.org
>
Subject: Question about factory pattern
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> This
question have previously been asked but I didn't get a reply, so
> I try
again.
>;
> When communicating with a factory/instance pair of WSRF
Web Services,
> a client first creates a new resource using the factory
service. The
> EPR returned to the client is used to identify the
resource, which can
> be reached using the instance service. This
requires that the client
> place a header element in the request soap
envelope.
>
> The factory service is a singleton service, so it
doesn't need a
> resource identifier in the header element. The problem
is that it
> seems to me that the factory service still needs a header
element to
be present.
>
> When using libraries used for
vanilla web services, this makes it
> harder to use the factory service.
The compulsory header element is
> not described in the WSDL file for
the factory service (or can this be
> done?), so the client has no
way to determine that the factory need a
> header element. This makes it
necessary to implent a client on a lower
>; level, making sure that
the header is there.
>;
> So, are there any way to either disable
the requirement of a header
>; element for the factor service, or
alternatively, is there a way to
> describe in the wsdl file for the
factory that a header element is
necessary?
>
> Friendly
regards,
>
> Jan Christian
Bryne
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To
unsubscribe, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For
additional commands, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For
additional commands, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-02 14:31:21 |
|
There is no stack trace in the log files, as far as I can see.
This the soap message returned from the factory when a client sends a request without any header:
<soapenv:Envelope
xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
xmlns sd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
xmlnssi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
; <soapenv:Body>
<soapenv:Fault>
<faultcode>soapenv:Client</faultcode>
; <faultstring>A
WS-Addressing Action SOAP header element is required by this
endpoint.</faultstring>
; <detail/>
</soapenv:Fault>;
</soapenv:Body>
</soapenv:Envelope>
I don't know the details of the implementation, but it seems to me that this is a Apache WSRF generated fault.
If I understood the log4java library better I could probably find out
more. If you need to know more, I'll get some more details.
- Christian
On 5/2/06, Campana Jr., Salvatore J <hp.com">sal.campanahp.com>; wrote:
Do you get a stack trace? I want to determine if it
is Axis expecting the header or if it is a certain class of ours which
is...
thx!
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 2:33 AM
Yes, the factory service is a singleton. Here is it's <bean>
element in wsrf-config.xml:
<;bean abstract="false" autowire="default"
class="no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryHome"
dependency-check="default" id="NCBI<bean abstract="false" autowire="default"
class="no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryHome"
dependency-check="default" id="NCBIBlastFactoryHome" init-method="init"
lazy-init="default" singleton="true">
<property
name="portComponentName">
<value>NCBI_BlastFactory</value>
</property>
<property
name="serviceClass">
<value>no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryService</value>
</property>
<property
name="resourceClass">
;
<value>no.uib.bccs.ncbiBlastFactoryWsdl.NCBIBlastFactoryResource</value>
</property>
</bean>
So making the factory service to
not expect a resource identifier was easy. But how can I make it to not expect a
header element at all?
- Christian
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr.,
Salvatore J <hp.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">sal.campanahp.com>; wrote:
Hmmm...
So
wait, you've implemented a Factory Service...You said you did it as
a
singleton...
Did you configure that in the config file, to make it
an actual
singleton service?
-----Original Message-----
From: gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">jan.christian.brynegmail.com
[mailto:gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
jan.christian.brynegmail.com]
On Behalf Of Jan Christian Bryne
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 2:28 PM
To:
ws.apache.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">wsrf-userws.apache.org
Subject:
Re: Question about factory pattern
Hi,
Thanks for you
reply.
My job is to make a web service interface to a bioinformatic tool
(blast). I have looked at the interop example in CVS and made
a
interface following the factory/instance pattern.
Everything works
fine, and I'm really grateful for the Apache WSRF
implementation. However,
I can not send requests to the factory service
without a header element.
When I remove it, I get an error message. It
doesn't seem to matter what is
inside the header, as long as it is
present!
The factory service is
in fact a singleton service, and so does not need
the header. But the
Apache WSRF still requires it to be there. To me
this seems like
unnecessary complexity, and the service would be better
without.
So,
is there any way to implement a singleton factory service that does
not
need the header element using Apache WSRF, or have I missed a
very
important point?
Friendly regards,
Jan Christian
Bryne
On 5/1/06, Campana Jr., Salvatore J <hp.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> sal.campanahp.com>;
wrote:
>;
> The required header is actually for the resource
instance itself...The
> only way around this is to make you resource
a singleton.....
>
> We could define some arbitrary attribute in
the wsdl file to denote
> this, however the spec does not outline
this...
>
> ________________________________
>; From:
gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">jan.christian.brynegmail.com
>
[mailto:gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
jan.christian.brynegmail.com]
> On Behalf Of Jan Christian
Bryne
> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 3:14 PM
> To: ws.apache.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">wsrf-userws.apache.org
>
Subject: Question about factory pattern
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> This
question have previously been asked but I didn't get a reply, so
> I try
again.
>;
> When communicating with a factory/instance pair of WSRF
Web Services,
> a client first creates a new resource using the factory
service. The
> EPR returned to the client is used to identify the
resource, which can
> be reached using the instance service. This
requires that the client
> place a header element in the request soap
envelope.
>
> The factory service is a singleton service, so it
doesn't need a
> resource identifier in the header element. The problem
is that it
> seems to me that the factory service still needs a header
element to
be present.
>
> When using libraries used for
vanilla web services, this makes it
> harder to use the factory service.
The compulsory header element is
> not described in the WSDL file for
the factory service (or can this be
> done?), so the client has no
way to determine that the factory need a
> header element. This makes it
necessary to implent a client on a lower
>; level, making sure that
the header is there.
>;
> So, are there any way to either disable
the requirement of a header
>; element for the factor service, or
alternatively, is there a way to
> describe in the wsdl file for the
factory that a header element is
necessary?
>
> Friendly
regards,
>
> Jan Christian
Bryne
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To
unsubscribe, e-mail: ws.apache.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For
additional commands, e-mail: ws.apache.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ws.apache.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For
additional commands, e-mail: ws.apache.org" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-03 13:05:20 |
Hi,
I don't think this has anything to do with the fact that it
is a
singleton. Even if there is no resource identifier in the
header, the
action header is required, for example:
<wsa:Action
mustUnderstand="1">http:/
/ws.apache.org/resource/example/filesystem/FileSystemPortTyp
e/yourWsdlRequestName</wsa:Action>
Regards,
Bruno.
Jan Christian Bryne wrote:
> There is no stack trace in the log files, as far as I
can see.
> This the soap message returned from the factory when a
client sends a
> request without any header:
>
> <soapenv:Envelope
> xmlns:soapenv="http://sche
mas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
> xmlnssd=&
quot;http://www.w3.org/20
01/XMLSchema"
> xmlnssi=&
quot;http://www.
w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
> <soapenv:Body>
> <soapenv:Fault>
>
<faultcode>soapenv:Client</faultcode>
> <faultstring>A WS-Addressing Action SOAP
header element is
> required by this endpoint.</faultstring>
> <detail/>
> </soapenv:Fault>
> </soapenv:Body>
> </soapenv:Envelope>
>
> I don't know the details of the implementation, but it
seems to me that
> this is a Apache WSRF generated fault.
> If I understood the log4java library better I could
probably find out
> more. If you need to know more, I'll get some more
details.
>
> - Christian
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-03 13:27:43 |
|
Hi,
Thank you for replying.
Yes, I have seen this also. But why is the wsa:Action element required?
The call to a factory service is just like a call to a vanilla web service, which doesn't require a header element.
Is there a specification that says that a factory service should have a header element?
If not, I think it would be better to implement the factory service to not require a header.
- Christian
On 5/3/06, Bruno Harbulot <manchester.ac.uk">Bruno.Harbulotmanchester.ac.uk> wrote:
Hi,
I don't think this has anything to do with the fact that it is a
singleton. Even if there is no resource identifier in the header, the
action header is required, for example:
<wsa:Action
mustUnderstand="1">
http://ws.apache.org/resource/example/filesystem/FileSystemPortType/yourWsdlRequestName</wsa:Action>
Regards,
Bruno.
Jan Christian Bryne wrote:
>; There is no stack trace in the log files, as far as I can see.
> This the soap message returned from the factory when a client sends a
> request without any header:
>
> <soapenv:Envelope
> xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
> xmlnssd="
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
> xmlnssi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
> <soapenv:Body>
> <soapenv:Fault>
> ; <faultcode>soapenv:Client</faultcode>
> ; <faultstring>;A WS-Addressing Action SOAP header element is
> required by this endpoint.</faultstring>
> ; <detail/>
> ; </soapenv:Fault>;
> ; <;/soapenv:Body>
>; </soapenv:Envelope>
>
> I don't know the details of the implementation, but it seems to me that
> this is a Apache WSRF generated fault.
> If I understood the log4java library better I could probably find out
> more. If you need to know more, I'll get some more details.
>
> - Christian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ws.apache.org">wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
| Question about factory pattern |
|
2006-05-03 13:36:01 |
Jan Christian Bryne wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for replying.
> Yes, I have seen this also. But why is the wsa:Action
element required?
> The call to a factory service is just like a call to a
vanilla web
> service, which doesn't require a header element.
>
> Is there a specification that says that a factory
service should have a
> header element?
> If not, I think it would be better to implement the
factory service to
> not require a header.
Isn't it required by the WS-Addressing specifications, for
all types of
web services (WSRF or not)?
Bruno.
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsrf-user-unsubscribews.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: wsrf-user-helpws.apache.org
|
|
[1-10]
|
|