Hi,
The changelog is quite short:
CHANGELOG for 9.9.0:
** Bug
* [WICKET-6957] - Declare JSPM 'uses' for IInitializer
* [WICKET-6965] - Memory leak in WicketEndpoint
** Improvement
* [WICKET-6960] - Reduce allocations when encoding ComponentInfo
* [WICKET-6963] - Use singletons for PanelMarkupSourcingStrategy
* [WICKET-6964] - Do not allocate when escaping empty string
Maybe WICKET-6963 causes the regression ?!
Can you reproduce it in a quickstart app ?
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:56 AM Korbinian Bachl <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I deployed our app on 9.9.0 this morning and after initializing a crawl of
> the page I ended up getting a low quote of 503s.
>
> The 503s are always the same:
> 2022-03-31 09:35:05,031 ERROR [org.apache.wicket.DefaultExceptionMapper]
> Unexpected error occurred
> org.apache.wicket.markup.MarkupException: <wicket:head> tags are only
> allowed before <body>, </head>, <wicket:panel> etc. tag
> at
> org.apache.wicket.markup.html.panel.AssociatedMarkupSourcingStrategy.nextHeaderMarkup(AssociatedMarkupSourcingStrategy.java:341)
> ~[wicket-core-9.9.0.jar:9.9.0]
> at
> org.apache.wicket.markup.html.panel.AssociatedMarkupSourcingStrategy.renderHeadFromAssociatedMarkupFile(AssociatedMarkupSourcingStrategy.java:236)
> ~[wicket-core-9.9.0.jar:9.9.0]
> at
> org.apache.wicket.markup.html.panel.AssociatedMarkupSourcingStrategy.renderHead(AssociatedMarkupSourcingStrategy.java:204)
> ~[wicket-core-9.9.0.jar:9.9.0]
> at
> org.apache.wicket.Component.internalRenderHead(Component.java:2649)
> ~[wicket-core-9.9.0.jar:9.9.0]
> ....
> at
> org.glassfish.grizzly.threadpool.AbstractThreadPool$Worker.doWork(AbstractThreadPool.java:569)
> [nucleus-grizzly-all.jar:?] at
> org.glassfish.grizzly.threadpool.AbstractThreadPool$Worker.run(AbstractThreadPool.java:549)
> [nucleus-grizzly-all.jar:?] at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:829) [?:?]
>
> Any idea how to debug this or where it may come from (race condition in
> our code as wicket became faster?)?
> It somehow seems to be a happen when requests coming in at the same
> time.... with 9.8.0 we got no such errors.
>
> Best,
>
> KB
>
>
>
>
