I'm getting close to a solution that works for at least my needs. Basically I modified the WebClient handleResponse method to look pretty much like the ClientImpl processResult method. Like ClientImpl a retry method is invoked on the WebClient by the conduit selector if there is an error that requires failover. The part I'm struggling with is building the failover URL from the base URL and the current URL. For example, if I have the following failover URLs configured for failover...
http://server1:8080/context1 http://server1:9090/context2 If I send a client request to http://server1:8080/context1/a/b/c and there is an IOException I want to fail this over to http://server:9090/context2/a/b/c. So far I haven't found a good way to figure out /a/b/c is what I want to prepend to the failover base URL. I think I need a few beers and it will all become clear. Chris -----Original Message----- From: Jim Talbut [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 12:57 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: WebClient Failover On 27/07/2010 20:09, Daniel Kulp wrote: > On Tuesday 27 July 2010 10:58:52 am Nelson, Chris wrote: > >> Is there a good way to implement failover in the WebClient? I have >> tried setting a FailoverTargetSelector on the client configuration, >> but that causes all kinds of problems. I've started creating a custom >> WebClient along with a new failover conduit selector, but I'm hoping >> there is an easier way. >> > Much of the failover stuff in CXF was designed more for the WSDL based things > and is designed to failover from port to port from the wsdl service. That > obviously isn't ideal for the REST stuff. A simple > FailoverTargetSelector that operates with just a list of URL's would > be a great start, but not something I've had time to really look at. > > Would you consider submitting some patches to enhance the failover > stuff in CXF to better support your use case? > This is just a me too, so I'd be very interested in seeing a solution for this. If you don't have time to do it yourself, Chris, maybe we could work together on it? Jim
