this can happen at some level..
for example if you have somewhere in the code that an error code is set as a
response
and that error code is mounted to a error page in the app server
then there are 2 request at the same time for the same thread to wicket..
I worked around that last weekend. But in this case the request
cycle/session can still be there or must be there.
johan
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Niels Bo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We have kind of the same problem.
> It looks like Application and Session are not always cleared from the
> request thread, and to test this I have just deployed a subclassed
> WicketServlet with these checks (and also as a workaround):
>
> protected void service(HttpServletRequest req, HttpServletResponse
> resp)
> throws ServletException, IOException {
> if(Application.exists()) {
> LogHelper.applicationLog(ILogEvents.LOGEVENT_UNEXPECTED,
> "Application on Thread");
> Application.unset();
> }
> if(Session.exists()) {
> LogHelper.applicationLog(ILogEvents.LOGEVENT_UNEXPECTED,
> "Session on Thread");
> Session.unset();
> }
> if(RequestCycle.get() != null) {
> LogHelper.applicationLog(ILogEvents.LOGEVENT_UNEXPECTED,
> "RequestCycle on Thread");
> RequestCycle.get().detach();
> }
>
> super.service(req, resp); // call WicketServlet
> }
>
> Our logs show that it actually happens that both Application and Session
> are
> already attached to the thread before the request is processed.
> I have only seen it once or twice in our development environment, but it
> happens a few times every hour on the production server.
>
> Niels
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Invoulentary-session-sharing-leakage-in-Wicket-1.3.x-tp16550360p16583880.html
> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
