You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by "volosied (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2026/10/07 14:46:01 UTC

[PR] MYFACES-4769: Use 512 as client ID length check [myfaces]

volosied opened a new pull request, #1096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/1096

   (no comment)


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@myfaces.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


Re: [PR] MYFACES-4769: Use 512 as client ID length check [myfaces]

Posted by "tandraschko (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
tandraschko commented on PR #1096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/1096#issuecomment-6040566871

   you know that the limit is a single clientId, right?
   you have a clientId with size over 256?
   
   like
   :myForm3000000000000000:myDataTable7000:panel11923123123123123123:panel123123123123:input1123123123123?


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@myfaces.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


Re: [PR] [41x] MYFACES-4769: Use 356 as client ID length check [myfaces]

Posted by "volosied (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
volosied merged PR #1096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/1096


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@myfaces.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


Re: [PR] MYFACES-4769: Use 512 as client ID length check [myfaces]

Posted by "volosied (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
volosied commented on PR #1096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/1096#issuecomment-6041910739

   Hey, this is more of an edge-case scenario.
   
   Most of our testing currently uses relatively small IDs (or auto-generated defaults), so we aren't likely to encounter this in our test coverage.
   
   My concern is around large enterprise applications with deeply nested naming containers and very large Facelets views. In those environments, developers are more likely to use fairly verbose component IDs, so a structure like the following wouldn't be unexpected:
   
   
   ```
   <h:form id="customerAccountManagementForm">
       <h:dataTable id="regionalCustomerPortfolioContainer"
                    value="#{[1]}"
                    var="portfolio">
           <h:column>
               <h:dataTable id="enterpriseBusinessRelationshipContainer"
                            value="#{[1]}"
                            var="relationship">
                   <h:column>
                       <h:dataTable id="strategicAccountOperationalHierarchyContainer"
                                    value="#{[1]}"
                                    var="hierarchy">
                           <h:column>
                               <h:commandButton
                                   id="asynchronousCustomerProfileSynchronizationButton"
                                   value="Submit">
                                   <f:ajax
                                       execute="@this"
                                       render="@form"/>
                               </h:commandButton>
                           </h:column>
                       </h:dataTable>
                   </h:column>
               </h:dataTable>
           </h:column>
       </h:dataTable>
   </h:form>
   ```
   In this case, the AJAX request would submit the following value:
   
   `javax.faces.partial.execute: "customerAccountManagementForm:regionalCustomerPortfolioContainer:0:enterpriseBusinessRelationshipContainer:0:strategicAccountOperationalHierarchyContainer:0:asynchronousCustomerProfileSynchronizationButton" `
   
   Which is 206 characters, and not far off from 256 limit. 
   
   My concern is less about extremely large IDs, but those just over the 256  threshold. 
   
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@myfaces.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


Re: [PR] MYFACES-4769: Use 512 as client ID length check [myfaces]

Posted by "tandraschko (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
tandraschko commented on PR #1096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/1096#issuecomment-6053639207

   TBH i never seen any clietnId that long like you posted
   what about increasing to 384?
   even that is sooo long...
   and then i would wait until we get a issue report.
   
   and please remeber, that all branches needs this


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@myfaces.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


Re: [PR] MYFACES-4769: Use 512 as client ID length check [myfaces]

Posted by "volosied (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
volosied commented on PR #1096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/1096#issuecomment-6043430598

   @tandraschko 
   
   I created 3 nested composite components with somewhat reasonable id names, and the id length was close to 200 characters.
   
   `enterpriseCustomerDashboardMainPageApplicationForm:clientDashboardLayoutWrapper:dashboardRegionalAccountDetailsPanel:regionalAccountDetailsCard:customerProfileSynchronizationSubmitButton`
   
   I don't think it's completely unreasonable to hit 256 (or higher), and I'm just trying to avoid regressions for any of our clients. (Additionally, not every app is coded nicely, so better to lean on the generous side) 
   
   If no objections, I'd hope to merge this. Thanks! 
   
   
   
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@myfaces.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


Re: [PR] MYFACES-4769: Use 512 as client ID length check [myfaces]

Posted by "volosied (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
volosied commented on PR #1096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/myfaces/pull/1096#issuecomment-6060453929

   I'll make it 356 (extra 100 characters), and update it across the branches. 
   
   Thanks!


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@myfaces.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org