How I've tackled it is by setting a request scope attribute in the filter. 
Before the filter is applied, a check is performed to see if this attribute 
has been set or not.. if it has then the request is an internal request.

In doFilter()....

// Check if filter has been marked as applied
if ( request.getAttribute( "filterapplied" ) != null ) {
         // Been done already - jump to next filter
         getFilterConfig().getNext().doFilter( request, response );
}
else {
         // Hasn't been applied yet, mark it as applied and do
         request.setAttribute( "filterapplied", Boolean.TRUE );
         // .... do filter stuff
}

-Joe Walnes

At 10:27 25/10/2000, you wrote:
>I'm implementing a clickstream analysis application, and I've run into a
>problem.
>
>Using servlet filter to intercept requests and add to the streams, I
>intercept all of the Orion internal requests as well! (ee <jsp:include>
>requests)
>
>Is there anyway to tell from looking at a request object or it's headers,
>whether the request came from Orion as an include, or from an external user?
>
>Cheers,
>Mike
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff Schnitzer
>Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 5:52 PM
>To: Orion-Interest
>Subject: TheServerSide forgot Orion
>
>
>The latest newsletter from TheServerSide.com includes this little
>snippet, included in a discussion of "What makes an application server
>succeed":
>
> > * Being compliant with the latest specs. Again, BEA has
> > shined here. They were 6 months ahead of the pack with
> > their EJB 1.0 product, which positioned them extremely well.
> > And they pulled it off again, recently releasing their EJB 2.0
> > beta server far sooner than any other vendor. History, it
> > seems, has repeated itself, and other vendors are playing
> > catch-up.
>
>I think those of us who have been using the EJB2.0 support in Orion to
>develop our beans for the last several months can see the error in that
>statement :-)  WebLogic doesn't even have support yet for
>container-managed relationships.  Geez.
>
>I sent TheServerSide a little note urging them to issue a correction.
>It's more likely to happen if they get many more comments.
>
>Jeff Schnitzer
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to