Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
    Ron Sigal
    @ronsigal
    Mmm, my 1 and 2 got turned into a 1 and 1.
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12

    Hi Ron - for (1) I don't think the client APIs (JAX-RS Client or MP Rest Client) support automatic provider discovery like the JAX-RS server APIs do. I'm not 100% sure about this, but I think that means that the client APIs should only use the "built-in" providers (like MBRs/MBWs for JSON and XML, etc.) and providers that are explicitly registered by the client (programmatically for the JAX-RS client, or programmatically or declaratively for MP Rest Client).

    My thought was that anything that JAX-RS allows to be injected via @Context should be allowed to be injected in the ClientHeadersFactory, though I haven't tested everything in CXF. Some things definitely have more value than others - for example, I think things like SecurityContext, UriInfo, HttpHeaders, Request, Application, etc. are more useful than say ResourceContext or Providers. Would you like to limit what can be injected? If so, I think we should probably phrase it something like "Implementations are required to inject X, Y, and Z, but may optionally inject A, B, and C." - that way implementations don't need to arbitrarily restrict what is injected. In any case, it is probably worth opening an issue to add TCK tests for @Context injection.

    For (2), good point. I think this is something that we should clarify - and I think it opens up some interesting situations. For example, suppose that a client has registered a ClientRequestFilter that contains @Context HttpHeaders myHeaders, and the client is executing in a JAX-RS request. Which set of headers should be injected into myHeaders, the headers for the outbound Rest Client request or the headers for the inbound JAX-RS request? Can you open an issue for this? I think we may need to leave it undefined for 1.4, but I think we should clarify it for 2.0.

    Ron Sigal
    @ronsigal
    Hi @andymc12, in eclipse-ee4j/jaxrs-api#746, Marek is proposing that automatic discovery of @Provider annotated providers should work on the server side. In that case, I think we could say that a Client would be getting endowed with some of the server environment. Similarly, if we mandate @Context injection of HttpHeaders, which the JAX-RS spec says is for the server-side only, then some of the server environment is available to the Client. What I'm trying to say is that I think the server environment either should or shouldn't be accessible from the Client. From that I would derive that either all of the @Context types should be injectable into ClientHeadersFactory, et al, or only Configuration and Providers should be injectable. I'm not even sure what the right answer is. I just think that whatever we say about @Context injection should follow from an answer to this deeper question. Because of that, I lean toward making @Context injection optional for now .... Having said that, I apologize for throwing sand in the gears at this late date.
    Btw, I'm happy to open the appropriate issues, once I know what they are. ;-)
    Ron Sigal
    @ronsigal
    I posed the question about Clients running in JAX-RS resources on eclipse-ee4j/jaxrs-api#746.
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12

    Thanks for posting the question on the JAX-RS issue - I'm also interested to see what the community says.

    For ClientHeadersFactory, I think it makes more sense to inject server-specific data since the intent of the CHF is to propagate or compute headers from the inbound JAX-RS request to the outbound MP Rest Client request.

    But for other providers, I don't think it is quite so clear... and there are probably use cases that could benefit from either one... but I agree with your comment in the issue that MP Rest Client should be consistent with the JAX-RS client.

    Ron Sigal
    @ronsigal
    In fact, I lean towards giving the Client access to the server's information. Maybe it could be optional. For now, I'm figuring out how to make it work in RESTEasy and hoping for some feedback.
    Ron Sigal
    @ronsigal
    I've just created issue "Client running in server context" (eclipse-ee4j/jaxrs-api#842) with a proposal to clarify this issue.
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    @ronsigal looks like the JAX-RS community likes your proposal. I agree with #249 that we should make @Context injection optional for now. I'll update the spec to indicate that. Thanks for following up on this issue!
    Ron Sigal
    @ronsigal
    Thanks, @andymc12, nice working with you.
    Derek P. Moore
    @derekm
    [CC: from eclipse/microprofile-architecture]
    Previously, I brought up the idea of MP Rest Client interfaces for MP Health & generic health checks that use those interfaces -- so that services can easily and generically check their remote service dependencies...
    I've run into an interesting hiccup that is worth thinking about, and also might be a sort of smell on its own.
    We have a few services that depend on each other (circular dependency) for different things. So using our generic MP-Rest-Client-based healthcheck to check each other's /health endpoint is dangerous.
    Since they'll infinitely recurse checking each other! :D
    should MP Health specify a simpler ping-like endpoint? Or HEAD on /health or something?
    such that GET /health is used by the orchestrator for load-balancer inclusion and dependent services can safely just check the "ping" endpoint to ensure the service is "UP"
    🇮🇪傻瓜
    @irishshagua_twitter
    Is there a way to parameterize ClientRequestFilter that is being added to a Rest Client interface via the RegisterProvider annotation? Ideally I'd like to inject the filter using CDI, as the parameter that I'm using involves a file location which I'd like to change in acceptance tests etc...
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    @irishshagua_twitter you cannot parameterize providers in the @RegisterProvider annotation, but iiuc, you should be able to accomplish the same thing using MP Config - i.e. use a default file location in the code, but lookup the file location using a config property so that you could change the location in different environments (using system properties, env vars, etc.).
    🇮🇪傻瓜
    @irishshagua_twitter
    @andymc12 cheers for coming back to me. Is ConfigProperty injection available in a class which is registered via RegisterProvider annotation?
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    @irishshagua_twitter I don't think it is not defined in the spec. I think most implementations just "new up" an instance of classes defined in the @RegisterProvider, which means that ConfigProperty injection would not be available. Basically, Config injection works in any object instance that is managed by CDI.
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    This is probably a good feature request to add to the next version of the Rest Client - basically something that says if CDI is available then all providers registered via @RegisterProvider should be managed by CDI.
    🇮🇪傻瓜
    @irishshagua_twitter

    @andymc12 It would definitely be a big +1 for me. I added an issue in github, maybe it can start the conversation there...

    eclipse/microprofile-rest-client#256

    🤷‍♂️

    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    Thanks for opening the issue @irishshagua_twitter - I’m a little bogged down right now, but I’ll take a look at it soon. It should be something that we do for the next release.
    Manish Kumar
    @manish2aug_twitter
    Hi guys, I am seeing an issue with async mp rest client (ibm liberty-19. 0.0.4, mprestclient 1.2) client r
    After retrieving the results from the client I found that it is deserialising list into hasmap
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    Hi @manish2aug_twitter - thanks for mentioning this. Can you open a GitHub issue with OpenLiberty at https://github.com/OpenLiberty/open-liberty/issues ? Please include as much information about the problem as possible (a sample app that reproduces the problem is best, but I'll take anything you have - logs, code snippets, etc.). I'll take a look at it when I can.
    Manish Kumar
    @manish2aug_twitter
    Thanks Andy! I logged eclipse/microprofile-rest-client#263, should I log on open-liberty github?
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    yes - this sounds like more of an issue with the implementation than the spec/API. We can leave the MP Rest Client issue open for now until we have determined for sure that it is an implementation issue.
    Manish Kumar
    @manish2aug_twitter
    Agree, issue created (OpenLiberty/open-liberty#11534), thanks
    Lorenzo Vannucchi
    @poldinik
    Hi, anyone knows how solve Invalid HTTP method: PATCH exception? I'm using microprofile 3.3 with Quarkus
    RestClient seems to not work with @PATCH
    Michał Szynkiewicz
    @michalszynkiewicz
    @poldinik I think it may be better to raise it on the Quarkus' Zulip. Personally, I haven't tried it and I don't remember if it should be supported
    Lorenzo Vannucchi
    @poldinik
    @michalszynkiewicz ok, thanks. however I thought it was a MP rest client problem
    i move on zulip
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12

    We don't specify @PATCH in the spec or test it in the TCK. That might be something we want to add?

    If the implementation is based on Java's HttpURLConnection API, then PATCH requests won't work - the Java implementation only allows HTTP methods that it knows about (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS - a few others, I think), but it doesn't allow PATCH methods...

    Implementations could use deep reflection to get around that limitation in the JDK - or use another HTTP Client API, like Apache HTTP Client. Also, I think the Java 11 HTTP Client API does not have this limitation (but of course, that requires Java 11+...).

    Lorenzo Vannucchi
    @poldinik
    @michalszynkiewicz @andymc12 if you are interested, the solution is using @POST and @HeaderParam("X-HTTP-Method-Override"). Then you have to set X-HTTP-Method-Override as "PATCH". This is workaround. I've solved in this way
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12

    Glad to hear that you are unstuck - keep in mind that HTTP servers not required to support X-HTTP-Method-Override (though most REST servers do).

    You could also use @ClientHeaderParam(name = "X-HTTP-Method-Override", value = "PATCH") on the method and then avoid needing to create a parameter for callers to pass "PATCH" to.

    Lorenzo Vannucchi
    @poldinik
    ok thanks for the advice
    ya, your solution is more elegant
    Heiko W. Rupp
    @pilhuhn
    Thanks for #217 I was just about to open the same issue :)
    Btw I submitted my PR for #267, but I fear it took me too long to still get it into 2.0
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    Hi Heiko, sorry for the delayed response. I'm still trying to figure out whether we can pull it in to the 2.0 release or not. I'll hopefully know more next week.
    Heiko W. Rupp
    @pilhuhn
    :thumbsup:
    Michał Szynkiewicz
    @michalszynkiewicz
    hi, I'm reworking how ClientHeaderParams are filled in Quarkus. In Quarkus we try to do as much as possible during build and I'm wondering if throwing an exception then on invalid method defined in ClientHeaderParam annotation could be thrown then too. WDYT?
    (currently TCK expects it thrown later, when the JAX-RS interface that has the error is used)
    Andy McCright
    @andymc12
    Hi @michalszynkiewicz - overall, I think that sounds reasonable. which TCK test are you referring to? I know that there are a few that will throw a RestClientDefinitionException when the client interface has something wrong with it
    Michał Szynkiewicz
    @michalszynkiewicz
    InvalidInterfaceTest for sure has some tests that assume the deployment goes okay and the exception is thrown later
    If I have a while, I will try to change the tests for params to accept either failing during deployment or on usage\
    Michał Szynkiewicz
    @michalszynkiewicz
    thanks @andymc12 !