Hi Scott,
Thanks for the reply. This is all very wierd, its possible there is a different version of java running, but only the one version of soap - I will have to take another look at this.
I put the xml sniffer on the lines and got the following :
1. One thats works :
<ExtractDate xsi:type="ns1:java.sql.Timestamp" xsi:null="true"/>
2. One that fails
<ExtractDate xsi:type="ns1:java.sql.Timestamp" xsi:null="true"/>
So the same value seems to be returned with each in the XML file.
>is an error that comes up only when you have xsi:type="xsd:ur-type"
>without xsi:null="true" or xsi:nil="true".
>without xsi:null="true" or xsi:nil="true".
Is this entry in the XML message or the specification of that object in through the soap admin interface.
Thansk again
Jonathan
Scott Nichol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If the value being serialized is really null and you have the same
version of Apache SOAP on the deployment server as the development, I
would expect things to work.
It is true that null values can be deserialized. This should be true
for beans you've mapped and ones you have not (ur-type). Given the
errors you have, though, it does not seem that a null is really being
serialized. For example
Can't yet deserialize non-null Objects;
is an error that comes up only when you have xsi:type="xsd:ur-type"
without xsi:null="true" or xsi:nil="true".
This makes me wonder whether you really have a null value you are
returning, and whether you are using the same version of Apache SOAP
in deployment (because handling of xsi:null and xsi:nil has been
improved along the way).
On 2 Jun 2003 at 16:03, Jonathan Roberts wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> I have 2 applications using a number of Value Objects. One of these is a Web Service. In the Web Service implementation the Timestamp is in one of the Value Objects however its value is nver set, and always null. On my development server this seems to work fine and seems to deal with it
(maybe false comfort).
>
> This is the same scenario on the deployment Server, however here it seems to fail. It's as if its denomination xsi:null="true", is sufficent to allow it through the soap system, i.e. since it is always null, soap has never attempted to try and deserialize it.
>
> Hope this makes sense.
>
> Jonathan
>
> Scott Nichol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> I don't see how it could ever work, unless some version of
> java.sql.Timestamp has a default ctor. The following code in
> BeanSerializer creates the bean:
>
> private Object instantiateBean(Class javaType)
> throws IllegalArgumentException
> {
> try
> {
> return javaType.newInstance();
> }
> catch (Throwable t)
> {
> throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unable to instantiate '" +
>
> StringUtils.getClassName(javaType) +
> "': " + t.getMessage());
> }
> }
>
> The newInstance is only going to work if the class has a default ctor
> (or in Sun's terminology, a "nullary constructor").
>
> On 2 Jun 2003 at 15:14, Jonathan Roberts wrote:
>
> > HI Scott,
> >
> > I thought I'd got around this by declaring the java.sql.Timestamp as a class in the xml file and loaded it with all the other classes. This seems to be fine on my machine but not on a deployment server. Could it be a class problem?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> > Scott Nichol wrote:
> > java.sql.Timestamp does not have a default constructor, which Apache
> > SOAP requires for instantiation. An alternative for you would be to
> > return a java.util.Date, which Apache SOAP knows how to serialize and
> > de-serialize.
> >
> > On 2 Jun 2003 at 10:54, Jonathan Roberts wrote:
> >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > I'm getting the following errors on the response from the soap server :
> > >
> > > on the
> > > r = c.invoke ( new URL( mstrHostString + "/soap/servlet/rpcrouter"), "" );
> > > call
> > > where Response r;
> > > and Call c;
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Error report :
> > > 1. If information exists and is returned :
> > >
> > > Unable to instantiate 'java.sql.Timestamp': java.sql.Timestamp
> > >
> > > You chose fetchAccountUsingAccountNo 10015301
> > >
> > > Exception = [SOAPException: faultCode=SOAP-ENV:Client; msg=Unable to instantiate 'java.sql.Timestamp': java.sql.Timestamp; targetException=java.lang.IllegalAr
> > >
> > > gumentException: Unable to instantiate 'java.sql.Timestamp': java.sql.Timestamp].
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 2. If no information:
> > >
> > > Exception = [SOAPException: faultCode=SOAP-ENV:Client; msg=
> > >
> > > Can't yet deserialize non-null Objects;
> > >
> > > targetException=java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Can't yet deserialize non-null Objects]
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Isssues :
> > >
> > > 1. I'm aware of problems with the timestamp and have set it up in the client side thus have named it explicitly :
> > >
> > > QName qn9 = new QName("urn:xml-IVR-App", "java.sql.Timestamp");
> > > //map the type
> > > smr.mapTypes(Constants.NS_URI_SOAP_ENC, qn9, java.sql.Timestamp.class, bsr, bsr);
> > > //telling the call object to use this mapping
> > > c.setSOAPMappingRegistry(smr);
> > >
> > > 2. and the xml
> > >
> > > >
> > > xmlns:x="urn:xml-IVR-App"
> > >
> > > qname="x:java.sql.Timestamp"
> > >
> > > javaType="java.sql.Timestamp"
> > >
> > > java2XMLClassName="org.apache.soap.encoding.soapenc.BeanSerializer"
> > >
> > > xml2JavaClassName="org.apache.soap.encoding.soapenc.BeanSerializer"
> > >
> > > />
> > >
> > > 3. Wierder - this works on the development machine but not on the stand-alone Test Server.
> > >
> > > Any help would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
> > >
> >
> >
> > Scott Nichol
> >
> > Do not reply directly to this e-mail address,
> > as it is filtered to only receive e-mail from
> > specific mailing lists.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
> >
>
>
> Scott Nichol
>
> Do not reply directly to this e-mail address,
> as it is filtered to only receive e-mail from
> specific mailing lists.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
>
Scott Nichol
Do not reply directly to this e-mail address,
as it is filtered to only receive e-mail from
specific mailing lists.
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
