> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 2:27 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Why isn't a service similar to another one not respecting
> the "Accept" header?
>
> I think I know the reason.
> Are you seeing this issue during the tests ?
> When doing something like this:
>
> WebClient wc = WebClient.create("http://bar";);
> wc.accept("application/json");
> wc.get();
> wc.accept("application/xml");
> wc.get();
>
> ?
>
> When a single instance is used, it accumulates header values, for those
> headers which can have multiple values. The earlier version probably
> did
> not do it.
>
> So the above is equivalent to
>
> wc.accept("application/json").accept("application/xml");
> wc.get();
> wc.get();
>
> or
>
> wc.accept("application/json", "application/xml");
> wc.get();
> wc.get();
>
> Thus if you prefer to use a single WebClient instance, then do
> webClient.reset() between the .accept() calls.
>
> I'll also add resetHeader() or replaceHeader to make things simpler for
> cases like this, as reset would also reset queries.
Sorry, but my test case is even simpler than this. I just send a single value
for the "Accept" header of "application/xml". It doesn't seem to have any
effect. If I instead use the ".json" extent on the request, that works fine.
This may be moot as the latter may be easier for our scenarios than setting the
"Accept" header, but I am somewhat concerned that the "Accept" header doesn't
appear to be recognized anymore.
> On 15/09/11 22:08, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> > Actually, reproduced, hmm, looks like a regression possibly caused by
> > the optimizations around JAXB-related providers -
> >
> > Sergey
> >
> > On 15/09/11 21:53, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> >> Works for me OK.
> >> I have @Produces({"application/json", "application/xml"})
> >>
> >> and then use WebClient to accept json or xml, works as expected.
> >>
> >> How does a request URI look like ? Does Accept has only a single
> value,
> >> can you capture the http trace ?
> >>
> >> Thanks, Sergey
> >>
> >> On 15/09/11 21:42, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> >>> Testing now...
> >>>
> >>> Cheers, Sergey
> >>> On 15/09/11 21:18, KARR, DAVID wrote:
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: KARR, DAVID
> >>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:23 AM
> >>>>> To: [email protected]
> >>>>> Subject: Why isn't a service similar to another one not
> respecting the
> >>>>> "Accept" header?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've had a CXF-based REST service in production for a little
> while. It
> >>>>> changes its response format either with the "Accept" header, or
> by
> >>>>> extension. I get xml with "Accept:application/xml" or if I add
> the
> >>>>> ".xml" suffix to the request. Similarly, I get JSON with the
> analogous
> >>>>> values for JSON. This service is using Jackson for its JSON
> >>>>> representation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I now have another service that will go to production soon. Using
> the
> >>>>> suffix for xml or json works fine. However, it seems to ignore
> the
> >>>>> "Accept" header. My "@Produces" annotation has both
> "application/json"
> >>>>> and "application/xml", in that order. I get JSON by default, and
> I
> >>>>> still get JSON if I send "Accept:application/xml" as an HTTP
> header.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just to make sure, I retested this same mechanism with the other
> >>>>> service, and it correctly changes the format based on the
> "Accept"
> >>>>> header.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One difference between the two services is that the new service
> isn't
> >>>>> using Jackson, it's using the default (Jettison, I assume).
> Otherwise,
> >>>>> the "jaxrs:server" and other configuration is almost identical
> between
> >>>>> the two services.
> >>>>
> >>>> Another difference is that the new service is using CXF 2.4.2, and
> the
> >>>> older service is using CXF 2.3.3.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Before I start pasting in my configuration and code, are there
> any
> >>>>> simple reasons why this might not be working?
> >>>
> >>
> >
