Issue is created as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-3916
I've run the following build command on 2.4.2 with this patched and it didn't give any errors: mvn -Pfastinstall,everything install Not sure if that build command runs the tests you're referring to or not. Thanks, Jesse -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 1:10 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Jesse Pangburn Subject: Re: partial response problem with SOAP 1.1 use of WS-Addressing and SOAPAction On Thursday, November 10, 2011 4:39:22 PM Jesse Pangburn wrote: > Hi Dan, > So I've read over this more and now see that the partial response stuff is > definitely for asynchronous processing, so the check with the WS-Addressing > relatesTo header makes sense. The problem (I think) appears in your > checkin revision 705446 for ClientImpl.java in this section: synchronized > (message.getExchange()) { > if (!isPartialResponse(message) && callback == null) { > message.getExchange().put(FINISHED, Boolean.TRUE); > message.getExchange().setInMessage(message); > message.getExchange().notifyAll(); > } > } > > You added the "&& callback == null" test, but I think what is needed is "|| > callback == null". The idea here (again, as I'm reading it) is regarding > these two cases: - it's an asynchronous response which is not a partial > response > - there is no callback, meaning it's a synchronous response > > In either of these cases you want to tell the exchange that it's finished > and the message you just got is the inbound message. I think this worked > for a long time without anyone running into this because in the synchronous > case (callback == null), the only way you get a partialResponse==true is > when WS-Addressing is engaged AND the server that you're connecting to > doesn't return the optional (but almost always used) relatesTo header. > Probably in the vast majority of cases either WS-Addressing isn't used or > the relatesTo header is present in a response. > > If you agree, I can create a defect and describe this. Since the change is > just && to ||, obviously it won't help to send you a patch file :-) That SOUNDS likely from the description, but I'd definitely need to run all the tests and such again to make sure. Can you file a JIRA with all this so I don't forget about it and to make sure it's tracked? Thanks! -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] http://dankulp.com/blog Talend - http://www.talend.com
