> -----Original Message----- > From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 2:41 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Why isn't a service similar to another one not respecting > the "Accept" header? > > Send me the trace please. Enable a Logging in/out interceptor or use a > tcp trace utility. Also make sure @Produces has two distinct String > values, not "application/xml, application/json"
Ah. Never mind. I just discovered an important clue, which is that I get different behavior depending on whether I deploy to my localhost, or to my server. For the latter, it was going through an internal proxy, which munged the "Accept" header. Once I told it not to use the proxy, this resolved itself. > On 15/09/11 22:37, KARR, DAVID wrote: > >> -----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? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >
