But the problem is with CXF 2.1.7, its not going into my interceptor code second time. It goes through my interceptor code fine, but then it fails with null pointer exception at *
java.lang.NullPointerException * at org.apache.cxf.transport.http.HTTPConduit$WrappedOutputStream.close(* HTTPConduit.java:1935*) at org.apache.cxf.io.CacheAndWriteOutputStream.postClose(* CacheAndWriteOutputStream.java:47*) at org.apache.cxf.io.CachedOutputStream.close(*CachedOutputStream.java:188*) at org.apache.cxf.transport.AbstractConduit.close(*AbstractConduit.java:66*) at org.apache.cxf.transport.http.HTTPConduit.close(*HTTPConduit.java:627*) at org.apache.cxf.interceptor.MessageSenderInterceptor$MessageSenderEndingInterceptor.handleMessage( *MessageSenderInterceptor.java:62*) at org.apache.cxf.phase.PhaseInterceptorChain.doIntercept(* PhaseInterceptorChain.java:236*) at org.apache.cxf.endpoint.ClientImpl.invoke(*ClientImpl.java:478*) at org.apache.cxf.endpoint.ClientImpl.invoke(*ClientImpl.java:308*) at org.apache.cxf.endpoint.ClientImpl.invoke(*ClientImpl.java:260*) at org.apache.cxf.frontend.ClientProxy.invokeSync(*ClientProxy.java:73*) at org.apache.cxf.jaxws.JaxWsClientProxy.invoke(*JaxWsClientProxy.java:127*) On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed October 28 2009 3:47:07 pm deepika vadapalli wrote: > > No.the request is huge but the resposne is just confirmation number. > > I get the resposne, log it once and then I get Null pointer Exception. > > > > This happens in a composite. > > I do not know how to provide a test case. > > Without a testcase that I can run, I really don't think there is anything I > can do to fix it. The best I can suggest is a workaround for you. > > In your loggers handleMessage, do something like: > if (message.containsKey("logging was done")) { > return; > } > message.put("logging was done", Boolean.TRUE); > > > That should prevent the second logging from triggering. > > I'd really like to know why it's even occurring. No idea on that and > without > a test case, not much I can do. > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Laxmi > > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Without a reproducible test case, I'm not sure if there is anything I'm > > > going > > > to be able to do. > > > > > > One thought: is the message coming back a fault? (hard to imagine a > > > fault > > > that big, but I suppose it's possible) > > > > > > Dan > > -- > Daniel Kulp > [email protected] > http://www.dankulp.com/blog >
