You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@cxf.apache.org by "Colm O hEigeartaigh (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2020/05/05 09:08:00 UTC

[jira] [Updated] (CXF-5216) WSDL definition cache issue for web service client when WSDL in service war changed

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-5216?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Colm O hEigeartaigh updated CXF-5216:
-------------------------------------
    Fix Version/s:     (was: Invalid)
                   3.4.0

> WSDL definition cache issue for web service client when WSDL in service war changed
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CXF-5216
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-5216
>             Project: CXF
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.6.2
>            Reporter: Bin Zhu
>            Assignee: Colm O hEigeartaigh
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 3.4.0
>
>         Attachments: CXF-5216-2.patch, CXF-5216.patch
>
>
> In current design, the WSDL definition will be cached in case the the same wsdl will be queried later.(WSDLManagerImpl.getDefinition)
> e.g.
>     public Definition getDefinition(String url) throws WSDLException {
>         synchronized (definitionsMap) {
>             if (definitionsMap.containsKey(url)) {
>                 return definitionsMap.get(url);
>             }
>         }
>         return loadDefinition(url);
>     }
> The cache mechanism indeed improves the performance in most scenarios. But if the WSDL file in service provider app changed, the client will not get the correct WSDL definition even using retrieves the wsdl from server dynamically (http://hostname:portname/xxx?wsdl),unless restarting the client app.
> It would be more reasonable to introduce a client property to allow user to disable the definition cache so that they can choose if they get WSDL definition from cache or the URL dynamically for their scenarios. Any thoughts? Thanks.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)