Return-Path: 
 <axis-dev-return-65470-apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive=ws.apache.org@ws.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 20878 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2007 07:26:08 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Aug 2007 07:26:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 21995 invoked by uid 500); 9 Aug 2007 07:26:06 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@ws.apache.org
Received: (qmail 21347 invoked by uid 500); 9 Aug 2007 07:26:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
list-help: <mailto:axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
List-Id: <axis-dev.ws.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Received: (qmail 21336 invoked by uid 99); 9 Aug 2007 07:26:05 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Aug 2007 00:26:05 -0700
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-100.0 required=10.0
	tests=ALL_TRUSTED
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received: from [140.211.11.4] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.4)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Aug 2007 07:26:03 +0000
Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6CB4714159
	for <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>; Thu,  9 Aug 2007 00:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <14330167.1186644342942.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 00:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Keith Godwin Chapman (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (AXIS2-3106) REST: inconsistent error handling
In-Reply-To: <13004397.1186620179828.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-3106?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12518646 ] 

Keith Godwin Chapman commented on AXIS2-3106:
---------------------------------------------

I debugged your case using a POJO.
 If you take a look at the WSDL you will see that minoccurs=0 in the parameters for your method as below.
<xs:element name="capturePriorAuth">
    <xs:complexType>
	<xs:sequence>
          <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="creditCardId" type="xs:int"/>
          <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="transactionId" nillable="true" type="xs:string"/>
          <xs:element minOccurs="0" name="amount" nillable="true" type="xs:decimal"/>
       </xs:sequence>
    </xs:complexType>
</xs:element>

Therefore the soap Message 

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<soapenv:Envelope xmlns:soapenv="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope">
  <soapenv:Body>
    <axis2ns15:capturePriorAuth1 xmlns:axis2ns15="http://manager">
      <transactionId>1518355879</transactionId>
      <amount>1.00</amount>
    </axis2ns15:capturePriorAuth1>
  </soapenv:Body>
</soapenv:Envelope>

is indeed correct. When the Axis Engine cannot find a parameter expected by the operation it checks the minoccurs and nillable attributes of the parameter and act accordingly. If the schema didnt have the attribute minoccurs=0 then Axis2 would have thrown an error saying that a required element was not found. 

Yes the Parameters and mapped incorrectly when they come into the operation. I guess the RPCMessageReceiver is in fault here. Will raise an issue on that against the RPCMessageReceiver. Thats the reason i didnt get the fault when using codegerated stuff as it uses a custom message receiver.



> REST: inconsistent error handling
> ---------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AXIS2-3106
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-3106
>             Project: Axis 2.0 (Axis2)
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 1.3
>         Environment: Axis2-1.3-RC2
> Tomcat 5.5
> Linux
>            Reporter: simishag
>            Assignee: Keith Godwin Chapman
>
> When using REST and making a simple HTTP GET request to Axis, the error handling is inconsistent.  It appears that fields in the query string are simply processed in order, without regard to the actual name of the field.
> Example:
> I have a method "capturePriorAuth" which takes 3 parameters: creditCardId (int), amount (BigDecimal), transactionId (String).  My test calls the method as: 
> .../capturePriorAuth?creditCardId=24&transactionId=1518355879&amount=1.00
> I was doing some testing earlier and I was accidentally using "requestId" as the name of the first field instead of "creditCardId."  Fixing that particular error resolved my immediate issue, but I had noticed some weirdness in the errors from when I was using the wrong field name.
> Normally, Axis would throw an AxisFault (usually from IllegalArgumentException) indicating that a required parameter was missing.  However, this behavior is inconsistent, and appears to depend on the order of the fields as defined in the method.  I wrote some test methods such as "capturePriorAuth[1-3]" to test the behaviors.
> For example:
> capturePriorAuth1?requestId=24&transactionId=1518355879&amount=1.00
> is actually accepted by Axis.  However, logging from within my service method shows that Axis is skipping the first field (requestId) entirely, and assigning the value of "transactionId" to the method's expected "creditCardId."  It then assigns "1.00" to "transactionId" (which works because 1.00 is a valid String) and sets "amount" to null.
> I ran this test through the SOAP Monitor as well, to see how Axis rewrote the request:
> <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
> <soapenv:Envelope xmlns:soapenv="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope">
>   <soapenv:Body>
>     <axis2ns15:capturePriorAuth1 xmlns:axis2ns15="http://manager">
>       <transactionId>1518355879</transactionId>
>       <amount>1.00</amount>
>     </axis2ns15:capturePriorAuth1>
>   </soapenv:Body>
> </soapenv:Envelope>
> The values are correct for this SOAP request, in that the 2 values are correct and the 3rd is missing.  However, Axis still accepts this request, even though the 3rd required field is obviously missing.  Logger output again shows the inconsistency described above.
> However, this example will throw an AxisFault: (notice the fields are reordered)
> capturePriorAuth2?requestId=24&amount=1.00&transactionId=1518355879
> Partial stack trace:
> org.apache.axis2.AxisFault: For input string: "1.00" at org.apache.axis2.AxisFault.makeFault(AxisFault.java:417)
> ...
> Caused by: java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: "1.00"
> 	at java.lang.NumberFormatException.forInputString(NumberFormatException.java:48)
> 	at java.lang.Integer.parseInt(Integer.java:456)
> 	at java.lang.Integer.<init>(Integer.java:620)
> 	at org.apache.axis2.databinding.typemapping.SimpleTypeMapper.getSimpleTypeObject(SimpleTypeMapper.java:83)
> That error presumably occurs because Axis skips the first parameter (which is unknown) and attempts to set "creditCardId" to "1.00", an invalid value for int.
> Here's another example: (fields reordered again)
> capturePriorAuth3?amount=1.00&transactionId=1518355879&requestId=24
> It also throws AxisFault, but not for the same reason:
> org.apache.axis2.AxisFault at org.apache.axis2.AxisFault.makeFault(AxisFault.java:417)
> ...
> Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
> 	at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> 	at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
> 	at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
> 	at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585)
> 	at org.apache.axis2.rpc.receivers.RPCUtil.invokeServiceClass(RPCUtil.java:194)
> 	at org.apache.axis2.rpc.receivers.RPCMessageReceiver.invokeBusinessLogic(RPCMessageReceiver.java:98)
> 	... 23 more
> This is probably the correct error handling mode, since creditCardId is unavailable.
> From this testing, it appears that Axis is not handling parameter names as provided in the HTTP GET query string, and instead simply sets the method parameters in the order they are parsed.  Because Axis also skips a parameter if its name is unknown, but it continues assigning values, creating an off-by-1 error as additional values are parsed.
> This leads to inconsistent error handling for methods which have identical implementations but different method signatures.  It also allows certain incorrect parameter combinations to be accepted by Axis and passed to the service method, which may not be prepared to handle them correctly.  Service code should be able to assume safely that Axis has done the hard work of parsing parameters.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org