I'm creating a webservice client using Metro with jax-ws and I want to override the endpoint address.
Using the following example from 2.11.1. BindingProvider.ENDPOINT_ADDRESS_PROPERTY I can do that:
http://metro.java.net/guide/How_to_invoke_and_endpoint_by_overriding_endpoint_address_in_the_WSDL.html
//Create service and proxy from the generated Service class.
HelloService service = new HelloService();
HelloPort proxy = service.getHelloPort();
((BindingProvider)proxy).getRequestContext().put(BindingProvider.ENDPOINT_ADDRESS_PROPERTY,
"http://new/endpointaddress");
proxy.sayHello("Hello World!");
But I don't understand why I can't use the service.getHelloPort().sayHello("Hello World!") instead of proxy.sayHello("Hello World!") as the example shows. If I do, the webservice client is using its default endpoint address instead of the one I want to use.
It looks like I'm getting a new instance of HelloPort every time I call getHelloPort()
Can anyone explain this?
there is little (read: no) difference between these:
service.getHelloPort().sayHello("Hello World");
and
HelloPort proxy = service.getHelloPort();
proxy.sayHello("Hello World!");
the service.getHelloPort() call will always return a new proxy/port instance. so any time you modify the request context for a given port object that modification is local to the specific port instance.
generally speaking the port instance you get back is re-usable and thread safe as long as you dont modify the request/response contexts. for the code sample you posted, it is modifying the request context to set the endpoint address, so it is advisable to get a new port object either every time you need one, or at the very least get a new object for each thread that needs one. (threadlocal is your friend for this)
Related
My application has two outgoing SOAP connections. For those, I want to implement TLS. Both are created using CXF.
The javax.xml.ws.Service.getPort() returns an individual bindingProvider (both connections use their own WSDL) but both use the same org.apache.cxf.bus.spring.SpringBus instance.
Before using the bindingProvider, I set the TLS client parameters on the Conduit:
Client client = ClientProxy.getClient(bindingProvider); // different
HTTPConduit httpConduit = (HTTPConduit) client.getConduit(); // same for both connections
TLSClientParameters tlsClientParameters = new TLSClientParameters();
tlsClientParameters.setTrustManagers(getTrustmanagers());
httpConduit.setTlsClientParameters(tlsClientParameters);
The issue is, the retrieved client is different for both connections, but the conduit is the same object. Thus, when I set the parameters for the second connection on the same object, I overwrite the priorly set settings.
The FAQ answer if CXF is threadsafe with "yes" and a number of exceptions. I think the second exception applies here. It says:
CXF answer: CXF proxies are thread safe for MANY use cases. The exceptions are:
[...]
Settings on the conduit - if you use code or configuration to directly manipulate the conduit (like to set TLS settings or similar), those are not thread safe. The conduit is per-instance and thus those settings would be shared. Also, if you use the FailoverFeature and LoadBalanceFeatures, the conduit is replaced on the fly. Thus, settings set on the conduit could get lost before being used on the setting thread.
[...]
For the conduit issues, you COULD install a new ConduitSelector that uses a thread local or similar. That's a bit complex though.
I'm not entirely sure if thread safety is my issue. I create the two connections each in their own component. Springs uses only one thread for initializing all the components, so both connections are initialized by the same thread. But afterwards, the connection is used threads from a pool. Overwriting the settings happens during intialization, so before sending actual SOAP messages using different threads.
When the Conduit is created in org.apache.cxf.endpoint.AbstractConduitSelector#getSelectedConduit, it is done using the SpringBus which is the same instance for both objects.
So, the FAQ tell me to use my own custom ConduitSelector.
I tried setting it before the initialization above:
Client client = ClientProxy.getClient(bindingProvider);
client.setConduitSelector(
new UpfrontConduitSelector(
new URLConnectionHTTPConduit(client.getBus(),
client.getEndpoint().getEndpointInfo())));
and I tried the same after the initialization. In both cases, after setting the conduit selector, when something uses the BindingProvider (which is a Proxy-object), it gets a NullPointerException although the object is not null.
My issue here is to either get the custom conduit selector running or to see that my issue can be solved completely differently or just to get some inspiration :)
Some guy on SO seems to have solved this here, but the answer to his question is not helping me.
I found a solution.
The issue indeed had nothing to do with multithreading, but with the way the SpringBus is wired into my objects and how the Conduit is created from it.
The solution was to give each service its own SpringBus.
So before I create each SOAP-service by calling its c'tor in javax.xml.ws.Service, I do
BusFactory bf = BusFactory.newInstance();
Bus b = bf.createBus();
BusFactory.setThreadDefaultBus(b);
which sets a new threadlocal default bus which is then used for the service created. Thus, my two services each have their own SpringBus and they both create their own Conduit.
This works because each service is a spring #Component and all spring components are created by the main thread. So there is only one thread and no way this code will not be executed sequentially.
Create a javax.ws.rs-ap.jar client and send the request to the server:
javax.ws.rs.client.Client client = ClientBuilder.newBuilder().build();
I have writtten the above code to call multiple api(get user by id, get all users and deleteUser).
My question is here.
I am creating a new Client for each api cal.
Just wanted to know i can create a single instance of Client and make multiple calls ?
Yes, a Client can be reused as long as it's lifecycle is managed properly. This means when a client instance is created, it should be closed properly as well using the close() method, once it's purpose is served. Refer to the Client API documentation.
Note that multiple client instances would be needed if each client has a different client configuration.
i am creating a http REST service that consumes other http REST services.
I am using Jersey Client to call other services and i have many doubt about which creation pattern of the http client is the best.
Currently i am using EJB with injection of the client that is a Singleton shared by every methods, but i would like to remove java ee dependency and use Jetty as embedded application server.
I see from the doc that Client creation is an expensive operation so i cannot create one every time i need it.
I think about creating 1 in the constructor of every Servlet/Rest class is the simpler solution but i am not sure about the lifecycle of the servlet (if an instance is created for every request, this method is quite the same as the previous)
Or maybe is better to create a Singleton shared by every Servlet/Rest class
Or maybe better a pool of N client.
About this last two solution i need some advice... What do you think it's the better solution?
Thanks
According to you, there is a REST Service deployed in some environment and there is one application, a client or consumer, which wants to access that service.
If i am writing a normal Java class as client using Jersey API, then i will write something lime this :
import com.sun.jersey.api.client.Client;
import com.sun.jersey.api.client.ClientResponse;
import com.sun.jersey.api.client.WebResource;
Client client = Client.create();
WebResource webResource = client
.resource("http://localhost:8080/rest/example/employees");
ClientResponse response = webResource.accept("application/json")
.get(ClientResponse.class);
String result = response.getEntity(String.class);
Now say you are writing a servlet, which does some defined job in you application, also it makes a call to the REST Service using client block of code, everytime you access the servlet it will create a instance of com.sun.jersey.api.client.Client each time.
If you want to avoid this then you can create a initial class that will create an instance of com.sun.jersey.api.client.Client, one and only, and make it static and use the same reference where ever you want. WebResource should be created as and when required, because you might be interested to call different URIs.
I would have followed this approach, if i were in your situation.
I've two web applications with one RESTFul service each one. In a service I need to call the second, for example, I Have StatusService and SomeService, depending on state SomeService do some different action. So when I call SomeService its call StatusService to get the current state then do the action.
So, I used reques.getServerPort() in my SomeService to call my StatusService, I have something like this
URL url = new URL("http://localhost:"+request.getServerPort()+"/app2/status");
It's working when I call the service directly from jboss .
But there are a Apache as a DMZ and only SomeService was externalized, so when I call SomeService via DMZ its try to call http://localhost:80/app2/status rather then http://localhost:8080/app2/status.
Is there another way to get the port?
Thanks in advance.
You could try request.getLocalPort
According to the javadocs it returns the port that the request was received on.
I have two Java EE applications on two separate application servers. One of them already contains a working EJB. I want to be able to communicate with this EJB from the other application by using a JAX-WS webservice (the communication has to work between different application servers and different server versions, so remote EJB call is no option). It is no problem to expose the server api to the client application.
The server side is quite clear, adding #Webservice annotation seems to work quite well. But i wonder what is the best way to build the client: I don't really want to generate the client stub from the wsdl (which itself has been generated from the ejb code by the container in my case) and pack all these generated classes into the client ear - but this seems to be the only way i can make use of #WebServiceRef annotations.
The alternative to make a dynamic proxy myself with the help of the static methods of javax.xml.ws.Service (sth. like service=Service.create() and service.getPort()) is not recommended by the Spec and "container providers are not required to support managed Service Instances created using these methods".
But that is exactly sth. that I want to use:
Is there a way to get a dynamic proxy injected in my code, managed by the application server? Or is the only way to get a managed webservice client instance to be done with generated client stub classes?
Read JAX-WS 2.2 spec, Chapter 4: Client APIs.
1. Static Client Generation
Is really the simplest way to work with JAX-WS. From a web services perspective, the WSDL is the interface AND the connection properties. Even if you choose not to work with it physically, you still need to know it in a logical sense to make meaningful SOAP calls.
Note from JAX-WS spec: An Endpoint that uses the SOAP 1.1/HTTP binding MUST
make its contract available as a WSDL 1.1 document at the publishing address suffixed with ?WSDL or ?wsdl
2. Dynamic Client Programming
Is there a way to get a dynamic proxy injected in my code, managed by the application server?
This approach involves dynamic programming against the JAX-WS API to connect to a web service either with or without using WSDL. There's no way to just "inject" a dynamic proxy out of nowhere. You need to construct & configure one with the SEI's port URLs. The WSDL document is the standard place to store such configuration information, although it is possible to avoid it and to programmatically insert the info.
2A) Dynamic programming with WSDL:
javax.xml.ws.Service service = Service.create(
new URL("http://example.org/stocks.wsdl"),
new QName("http://example.org/stocks", "StockQuoteService"));
com.example.StockQuoteProvider proxy = service.getPort(portName,
com.example.StockQuoteProvider.class)
javax.xml.ws.BindingProvider bp = (javax.xml.ws.BindingProvider)proxy;
Map<String,Object> context = bp.getRequestContext();
context.setProperty("javax.xml.ws.session.maintain", Boolean.TRUE);
proxy.getLastTradePrice("ACME");
Advantages over (1): can dynamically dynamically change the WSDL doc after app is deployed, provided such changes do not affect the java interface to client.
i.e. very little benefit to you. Your WSDL is static. Whilst you could point your client to <service endpoint URL>?wsdl to dynamically lookup, this means you need to manually configure <service endpoint URL> AND that leaves little else that can change in the SEI/WSDL without impacting your client logic.
2B) Dynamic programming without WSDL:
String endpointUrl = ...;
QName serviceName = new QName("http://example.org/wssample/echo/", "EchoService");
QName portName = new QName("http://example.org/wssample/echo/", "EchoServicePort");
/** Create a service and add at least one port to it. **/
Service service = Service.create(serviceName);
service.addPort(portName, SOAPBinding.SOAP11HTTP_BINDING, endpointUrl);
/** Create a Dispatch instance from a service.**/
Dispatch<SOAPMessage> dispatch = service.createDispatch(portName,
SOAPMessage.class, Service.Mode.MESSAGE);
/** Create SOAPMessage request. **/
// compose a request message
MessageFactory mf = MessageFactory.newInstance(SOAPConstants.SOAP_1_1_PROTOCOL);
// Create a message. This example works with the SOAPPART.
SOAPMessage request = mf.createMessage();
SOAPPart part = request.getSOAPPart();
// Obtain the SOAPEnvelope and header and body elements.
SOAPEnvelope env = part.getEnvelope();
SOAPHeader header = env.getHeader();
SOAPBody body = env.getBody();
// Construct the message payload.
SOAPElement operation = body.addChildElement("invoke", "ns1",
"http://com/ibm/was/wssample/echo/");
SOAPElement value = operation.addChildElement("arg0");
value.addTextNode("ping");
request.saveChanges();
/** Invoke the service endpoint. **/
SOAPMessage response = dispatch.invoke(request);
Advantage (not really): can eventually get it to carry out same behaviour as above.
Disadvantages: Complex programming. Non-standard configuration (outside of WSDL). Need to avoid hard-coding settings. Brittle to interface changes. Manually synchronising settings between server and client - easy to omit something, extremely difficult to debug.
Answer:
Go back to (1). Generate a client stub from the WSDL. Use it as an interface contract - it should be designed well and not change.
Then spend the time you save solving real problems... ;) ;)