Hi
On 12/01/13 14:53, Martin Stiborský wrote:
Hi Raul and Sergey,
Guys please, could you explain more for me the "second option" ?
I missed the point I guess.
I thought the idea around sharing the port was actually to do with
dynamically attaching new contexts to the base address like
"localhost:9007", with every new custom bundle introducing a new context
like "/a". etc. I guess in OSGI one can address this task by having a
master JAX-RS root resource listening for new bundles and registering
them as JAX-RS subresources in the internal map and then removing them
once the corresponding bundles have been removed
HTH
Sergey
Thanks!
On Jan 11, 2013 3:00 PM, "Sergey Beryozkin"<sberyoz...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Raúl
On 11/01/13 13:28, Raul Kripalani wrote:
Hi Sergey,
Thanks for the quick answer. We were already on our way to implement the
second option!
Just a thought off the top of my head... Does it make sense to enhance CXF
or the Jetty CXF Transport so that it's able to figure out this situation
transparently and build the servlet mappings accordingly?
This is possible when CXF Servlet transport is used (with default
context /cxf which is configurable and relative endpoint address values)
but not when every endpoint with an absolute address is powered by (CXF)
Jetty transport.
Besides, the URI path starting from a given root resource's @Path value is
not visible to CXF transports given that this @Path value does not
represent the final URI path segment in most cases.
Cheers, Sergey
Regards,
*Raúl Kripalani*
Apache Camel Committer
Enterprise Architect, Program Manager, Open Source Integration specialist
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/**
raulkripalani<http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani>
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter:
@raulvk<http://twitter.com/**raulvk<http://twitter.com/raulvk>
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Sergey Beryozkin<sberyoz...@gmail.com**
wrote:
Hi
On 11/01/13 12:53, Raul Kripalani wrote:
Hi all,
Quick question.
Has anyone tried to run several CXFRS consumers on different bundles
binding to the same port (e.g. 9007), where each consumer has a
different
root resource stemming from a different path?
*Bundle A:*
<cxf:rsServer id="rsServer"
address="http://0.0.0.0:9007";
serviceClass="com.mycompany.****ResourceA" />
*Bundle B:*
<cxf:rsServer id="rsServer"
address="http://0.0.0.0:9007";
serviceClass="com.mycompany.****ResourceB" />
*ResourceA* annotated with @Path("/resourceA")
*ResourceB* annotated with @Path("/resourceB")
It looks like the latest bundle to initialise gets ownership of the
port,
i.e. they become mutually exclusive.
will cxf:rsServer work with relative addresses, example, the first one
with "/resourceA", second - with "/resourceB", and both ResourceA&
ResourceB root resources having @Path("/") ?
May be another option is to have a single cxf:rsServer listening on "
http://0.0.0.0:9007";, with it root resource listening on "/" and
dynamically managing subresources which in turn can handle "/resourceA",
"/resourceB", etc, where every subresource is provided or removed
externally via different bundles ?
Cheers, Sergey
Any ideas on how to make this work? Do you think this question is more
on
the Camel or CXF side of the fence?
Thanks!
*Raúl Kripalani*
Apache Camel Committer
Enterprise Architect, Program Manager, Open Source Integration
specialist
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/**
raulkripalani<http://www.**linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani<http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani>
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter:
@raulvk<http://twitter.com/****raulvk<http://twitter.com/**raulvk>
<http://twitter.com/**raulvk<http://twitter.com/raulvk>>
