Alright, I tried logging the hash codes of the Request instance within the first pipeline, and then in the redirected to pipeline, and the hash codes are always different. Moreover, it doesn't look like HttpRequest overrides the hashCode() method (looking at the Cocoon API docs), so it's probably just based on memory location or something. This is probably a good indication that the objects are different (and hence contain different info), since the object probably wouldn't be moved just for a redirect.
In any case, it kind of sucks to resort to storing the things in the session that I only want to persist for the duration of the request and then have to delete them. It seems to me that if request params can be preserved for an internal redirect, then why not request attributes as well? Of course, I might not be seeing some design issue, but it'd be good to know *what* I'm not seeing. ;-)
Let me know what you think,
Sonny
From: Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: new Request for internal map:redirect-to's? Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:55:47 +0100
Sonny Sukumar wrote: ...
Anyhow, with all that said, my original question still stands: Is a new Request instance still produced when such an internal redirect is handled? See my sitemap snippet below:
<map:match pattern="someUri"> <map:action type="some-action"/> <map:redirect-to uri="cocoon:/anotherUri"/> </map:match>
<map:match pattern="anotherUri"> ... </map:match>
In the "some-action" action, I set a Request attribute, which is gone by the time "anotherUri" produces output. I know it is being set properly since I've logged it and it looks fine.
From a cursory look at the code, it seems that the query string should survive, but I'm not so sure about form parameters. Do you use POST or GET? If you use POST, can you switch to GET and see if it now works?
Regards, Upayavira
From: "Jay Freeman \(saurik\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: new Request for internal map:redirect-to's? Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 03:03:50 -0500
Sonny:
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't even pay attention to that. :(
Sincerely, Jay Freeman (saurik) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sonny Sukumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 2:19 AM Subject: Re: new Request for internal map:redirect-to's?
>
> It's not supposed to send an HTTP redirect if using the "cocoon:/"
protocol
> and syntax--at least not in Cocoon 2.1. I checked headers and all, but I
> don't see my browser processing a redirect at all like I did using the
same
> syntax in 2.0.4.
>
> In any case, maybe one of the people knowledgeable on 2.1 can comment?
> Geoff, anyone else?
>
> Sonny
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
