On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 11:31 -0700, David Hosier wrote:
> I'm using the DefaultHttpClient to make the call, yes. I want to use 
> DefaultHttpClient with the ResponseHandler the way I am supposed to. However, 
> the API does not give me the ability to get a hold of the Entity if the 
> status code is 404, because it throws an Exception which does not contain the 
> entity value. I need the Entity value, even if the call returns 404. As far 
> as I can tell, I cannot get the information I need from the API the way it is 
> designed to be used. Is that clearer? Is my assessment correct?
> 

Yes, it is intentional that the exception thrown does not contain a
response body, because it would involve reading the entire body content
into a memory buffer.

Oleg


> -- David Hosier
> 
> On Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 10:47 -0700, David Hosier wrote:
> > > I am using this to interface with some REST services. One key to a good 
> > > REST service is to never let something like a 404 spit out the server's 
> > > generic 404 HTML page in response to a REST request. So my service 
> > > instead returns an entity with the 404 that says something like "Could 
> > > not find alert 12334". I should be able to show this response entity. 
> > > However, given the way the ResponseHandler works with HttpClient, this is 
> > > not possible, because the entity is not part of the Exception that is 
> > > thrown when the ResponseHandler encounters a 404. Without manually 
> > > reading the entity after ResponseHandler throws an Exception, I would 
> > > only be able to show the fields that are contained in the Exception. That 
> > > means I could only show the text 'Not Found', which is hardly meaningful 
> > > since the status code of 404 already tells me that.
> > 
> > You are using ResponseHandler to interface with some REST services
> > without using DefaultHttpClient? I am sorry but it still makes no sense
> > to me. You might as well handle responses from that service _any_ way
> > you like without using a ResponseHandler.
> > 
> > Oleg
> > 
> > > -- David Hosier
> > > 
> > > On Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 02:59 -0700, David Hosier wrote:
> > > > > Ok, I see what the difference is in this situation. I am not passing 
> > > > > the ResponseHandler to the execute() method. I am actually calling 
> > > > > handleResponse() on the ResponseHandler manually.
> > > > 
> > > > I honestly see no sense in doing so. ResponseHandler is pretty much
> > > > useless without the resource management code in AbstractHttpClient.
> > > > 
> > > > What is the reason you want to invoke #handleResponse manually?
> > > > 
> > > > Oleg
> > > > 
> > > > >  The problem I have with the implementation is that I return error 
> > > > > messages on error conditions. With the way this works, you can only 
> > > > > get very basic information from the HttpResponseException. For 
> > > > > example, on a 404, it looks like the Exception only contains 404 and 
> > > > > 'Not Found'. I am able to pluck out the entity when invoking 
> > > > > handleResponse() manually by simply consuming the entity myself, but 
> > > > > it's not possible to get the entity if the ResponseHandler is passed 
> > > > > to execute() and the status is not 2xx. Am I off base here or is my 
> > > > > analysis correct? Would you recommend that if I really need the 
> > > > > entity on a non-2xx response that I just keep manually consuming the 
> > > > > entity? I'm not sure it would make sense for your library to attempt 
> > > > > to consume the entity in BasicResponseHandler and try to add it as an
> > > > >  other fi
> > > > > eld to the HttpResponseException. The AbstractHttpClient code you 
> > > > > linked me to would have to change if you did that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > -- David Hosier
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 2:30 AM, David Hosier wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > On Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 13:44 -0700, David Hosier wrote:
> > > > > > > > Perhaps I'm wrong, but the code for BasicResponseHandler in 
> > > > > > > > httpclient 4.1.2 does not satisfy the javadocs as written. The 
> > > > > > > > javadoc states the following:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > "If the response code was >= 300, the response body is consumed 
> > > > > > > > and an HttpResponseException 
> > > > > > > > (http://hc.apache.org/httpcomponents-client-ga/httpclient/apidocs/org/apache/http/client/HttpResponseException.html)
> > > > > > > >  is thrown."
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > However, the code does not do that:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > StatusLine statusLine = response.getStatusLine();
> > > > > > > > if (statusLine.getStatusCode() >= 300) {
> > > > > > > >  throw new HttpResponseException(statusLine.getStatusCode(),
> > > > > > > >  statusLine.getReasonPhrase());
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > HttpEntity entity = response.getEntity();
> > > > > > > > return entity == null ? null : EntityUtils.toString(entity);
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > The code clearly throws the Exception without reading the 
> > > > > > > > entity. So what happens is that if you get a non-2xx response, 
> > > > > > > > connections are never released as can be seen by enabling DEBUG 
> > > > > > > > logging for the library. Am I misreading the code or javadocs, 
> > > > > > > > or is this really broken? If I catch the Exception and then 
> > > > > > > > read the entity manually like shown above, I can see the 
> > > > > > > > connections being closed.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > -David
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Hi David
> > > > > > > The resource management is taken care of by HttpClient [1]. I do 
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > think BasicResponseHandler is broken. The whole point of 
> > > > > > > ResponseHandler
> > > > > > > is to free the user from having to worry about resource 
> > > > > > > management and
> > > > > > > response entities.
> > > > > > Interesting. Thanks for the link to the code. I can assure you that 
> > > > > > in my situation however, that the connections are not getting 
> > > > > > closed. I'll take a closer look at the code and compare it to this 
> > > > > > linked code to see if I'm using the right stuff. My assumption at 
> > > > > > this point then is that I'm just doing something wrong. Thanks. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Oleg
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > http://hc.apache.org/httpcomponents-client-ga/httpclient/xref/org/apache/http/impl/client/AbstractHttpClient.html#930
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> > > > > > > > [email protected] 
> > > > > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> > > > > > > > [email protected] 
> > > > > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> > > > > > > [email protected] 
> > > > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> > > > > > > [email protected] 
> > > > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> > > > > > [email protected] 
> > > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > > (mailto:[email protected])
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > (mailto:[email protected])
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
> > (mailto:[email protected])
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to