cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paweł Lipka <>
Subject RE: Websphere and CXF
Date Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:27:35 GMT
Make sure that you leave the 'Deploy Web Services' option unchecked on
one of WebSphere's application deployment screens. 
If you check this option you make WebSphere scan all the classes for
JAX-WS annotations. As a result your SEIs and their impls are processed
by WebSphere's native JAX-WS stuff rather than CXF (as if you did not
use CXF at all)
I've one of the latest WebSphere versions + CXF 2.2.2 without any issues
related to stax. The only problem i noticed is that sometimes CXF was
unable to generate the WSDL at all due to XmlSchema.jar incompatiblity
(which i bypassed by defining a WebSphere's shared library with inverted
classloading order).



On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 07:46 -0400, Aaron Ehrensberger wrote:
> Thank you for responding!  At least you gave me a starting point.  Now,
> with that in mind, is there a good starting point for documentation on
> this stuff?  Any hints on that?
> Aaron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Kulp [] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 4:39 PM
> To:
> Cc: Aaron Ehrensberger
> Subject: Re: Websphere and CXF
> On Fri September 4 2009 4:35:32 pm Aaron Ehrensberger wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I'm trying to deploy my webservices on Websphere.  Originally using
> > Eclipse IDE, Jboss/Tomcat, Spring and CXF, I have the webservices
> > deploying with no issues.
> > 
> > However, when bringing the code into Websphere and attempting to
> deploy
> > the same .war file created and tested in the first setup, I get a
> > different WSDL that is missing multiple namespaces.  This causes the
> > WSDL to not load and give me headaches.
> > 
> > Does anybody have any thoughts as to what is changing things?  Our
> code
> > is mainly straight java and so it should port between the two app
> > servers without any migration issues, but it doesn't.  Ideas on what I
> > can look into?
> It's PROBABLY due to the STAX implementation.  If you can try getting
> woodstox 
> in there to be used, it would probably be better off.    The IBM stax
> stuff is 
> notorious for choosing alternative interpretations of the spec and
> generally 
> making it harder to use.     It also doesn't perform as well as
> woodstox.
Paweł Lipka
Senior IT Architect, A Bull Group Company
ul. Łąkowa 29
90-554 Łódź
tel.: (+48 42) 634 56 78

Treść niniejszej wiadomości może być poufna.
Jeżeli nie jesteście Państwo jej adresatem, to rozprowadzanie
lub wykorzystywanie zawartych tu informacji jest zabronione.

This e-mail contains material that is confidential for the sole
use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution
by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
the sender and delete all copies.

View raw message