Mailing-List: contact axis-user-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <41E38FFA.9020204@drexel.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 03:36:10 -0500
From: V D <st946tbf@drexel.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: axis-user@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Please help vote for this issue
References: <41E2C0ED.3030206@drexel.edu>
 <BAY20-DAV1426987D31367AD0253460C9880@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BAY20-DAV1426987D31367AD0253460C9880@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thank you for pointing this out.  However, what about the problem of 
attachment to a different request.  Right now, after the the first 
request the receive an attachment, using the same stub to make another 
request (a different function call) would then send the attachment.  
This should not happen at all because the 2nd request does not have 
attachment.  If store the attachment separately for request and 
response, this means that if the 1st request send an attachment, then 
the 2nd request (which does not have attachment in the function call) is 
made would also send the attachment.


Jongjin Choi wrote:

>Sorry for double posting to axis-dev, axis-user.
>But I think that the devs should give attention to this problem.
>
>This problem is reported to Jira several times. The related ones are:
>
>http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS-1433
>http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS-1430
>
>The problem is org.apache.axis.Stub's 'attachments' member.
>Stub uses 'attachments' in both request and response.
> 
>After receving soap message, the stub's extractAttachments() method stores the response attachments 
>to its 'attachements' member. 
>On the next call, the setAttachments() method stores the previous attachments to the request soap message.
>
>I think the axis's stub class is designed to handle attachments more flexiblely like this:  
>(in test.wsdl.interop4.groupG.dime.doc.DimeDocInteropTestCase's test5DimeDocSoapPortEchoUnrefAttachments())
>
>AttachmentsPortType binding = ...;  
>DataHandler dh = ...
>((org.apache.axis.client.Stub)binding).addAttahcment(dh);
>binding.echoUnrefAttachments();        // Stub.setAttchment() and Stub.extractAttachement() called. 
>Object attachments[] = ((org.apache.axis.client.Stub)binding).getAttachments();
>
>I think the Stub should have two seperate attachments member for request and response
>for retaining interfaces above and fixing the bugs reported.  
>The methods for attachment need to be rearranged:
>
>getAttachments : (deprecated) use getResponseAttachments() instead.
>clearAttachments : clear all REQ/RESP attachments
>addAttachment : adding attachment to REQUEST attachment 
>setAttchment : storing REQUEST attachments to soap message 
>extractAttachment : extracting RESPONSE attachment from soap message
>getRequestAttachments: (NEW) returning the REQUEST attachments
>getResponseAttachments: (NEW) returning the RESPONSE attachments
>
>Any opinion?
>
>/Jongjin 
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Vy Ho" <st946tbf@drexel.edu>
>To: "Axis-User" <axis-user@ws.apache.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 2:52 AM
>Subject: Please help vote for this issue
>
>
>  
>
>>When using DataHandler, Axis would often erroneously send the attached 
>>data in the next different request (that has no attachment whatsoever).  
>>This is an error by itself and also causes application freezes up.  I 
>>believe this is really a serious issue and a show stopper.  Please vote 
>>for it at:
>>
>>http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS-1729
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>