[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-2218) New payload interface
by Pedro Ruivo (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/JGRP-2218?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Pedro Ruivo commented on JGRP-2218:
-----------------------------------
[~belaban] if I recall correctly, or it was to avoid allocating a new array or to avoid a map lookup for the ISPN command to marshall.
If it was the first one, with the {{ByteMessage}}, I would have to marshall the command and create a new array to populate the {{ByteMessage}}
If it was the second, it would save a map lookup and 2 bytes:
{{ByteMessage}} size: msg_type + headers + address + ispn_command_id (*2 since we wrap the Command into a RpcCommand) + command_payload
{{BackUpMessage}} size: msg_type + headers + address + payload
> New payload interface
> ---------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-2218
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/JGRP-2218
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Reporter: Bela Ban
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 5.0
>
> Attachments: jgrp-2218.jfr, master.jfr
>
>
> h3. Goal
> Change payload in {{Message}} from byte[] arrays to a {{Payload}} interface which can have multiple implementations.
> h3. Reason
> Currently, having to pass a byte[] array to a message leads to unnecessary copying:
> * When an application has a ref to an NIO (direct) {{ByteBuffer}}, the bytes in the byte buffer have to be copied into a byte[] array and then set in the message
> * When the application sends around byte[] arrays, but also wants to add some additional metadata, e.g. type (1000-byte requests/responses), it needs to create a new byte[] array of (say) 1001 bytes and copy the data (1000 bytes) plus the request type (1 byte) into the new copy. Example: {{MPerf}} and {{UPerf}}
> * When an object has to be sent (e.g. in Infinispan), the object has to be marshalled into a byte[] array (first allocation) and then added to the message. With the suggested {{ObjectPayload}} (below), marshalling of the object would occur late, and it would be marshalled directly into the output stream of the bundler, eliminating the byte[] array allocation made by the application.
> h3. Design
> Instead of copying, the application creates an instance of {{Payload}} and sets the payload in {{Message}}. The {{Payload}} is then passed all the way down into the transport where it is marshalled and sent. There can be a number of payload implementations, e.g.
> * {{ByteArrayPayload}}: wraps a byte[] array with an offset and length
> * {{NioDirectPayload}}: wraps an NIO direct {{ByteBuffer}}
> * {{NioHeapPayload}}: wraps an NIO heap-based {{ByteBuffer}}
> * {{CompositePayload}}: wraps multiple Buffers. E.g. type (1 byte) and data (1000 bytes) as described above
> * {{IntPayload}}: a single integer
> * {{ObjectPayload}}: has an Object and a ClassLoader (for reading), plus a Marshaller which know how to marshal the object, this allows for objects to be passed in payloads and they're only marshalled at the end (transport).
> * {{PartialPayload}}: a ref to a {{Payload}}, with an offset and length
> * {{InputStreamPayload}}: has a ref to an input stream and copies data from input- to output stream when marshalling
> The {{Payload}} interface has methods:
> * {{size()}}
> * {{writeTo(DataOutput)}}
> * {{readFrom(DataInput)}}
> * {{getInput()}}: this provides a {{DataInput}} stream for reading from the underlying payload
> and possibly also
> * {{acquire()}} and
> * {{release()}} (for ref-counting)
> * {{copy()}}
> Each payload impl has an ID and it should be possible to register new impls. A {{PayloadFactory}} maintains a mapping between IDs and impl classes.
> When marshalling a {{Payload}}, the ID is written first, followed by the payload's {{writeTo()}} method. When reading payloads, the {{PayloadFactory}} is used to create instances from IDs.
> h4. Fragmentation
> When fragmenting a buffer, the fragments are instances of {{PartialPayload}} which maintains an offset and length over an underlying payload. When marshalling a {{PartialPayload}}, only the part between offset and offset+length is written to the output stream.
> For fragmentation, method {{size()}} is crucial to determine whether a payload needs to be fragmented, or not. If, for example, a payload (e.g. an {{ObjectPayload}}) cannot determine the correct size, it may return {{-1}}. This leads to the {{ObjectPayload}} getting marshalled right away and getting wrapped into a {{ByteArrayPayload}}. So if {{size()}} cannot be determined, we have exactly the same behavior as what's currently done.
> h4. Reference counting
> If we implement ref-counting, then payloads can be reused as soon as the ref-count is 0. For example, when sending a message, the payload's ref-count could be incremented by the app calling {{acquire()}}. (Assuming the message is a unicast message), {{UNICAST3}} would increment the count to 2. This is needed because {{UNICAST3}} might have to retransmit the message if it was lost on the network, and meanwhile the payload cannot be reused (changed). The app calls {{release()}} when the {{JChannel.send()}} call returns, but the payload cannot be reused until {{UNICAST3}} calls {{release()}} as well. This will happen when an {{ACK}} for the given message has been received.
> h4. Payload factory
> When a request is received, the buffer is created from the bytes received on the network, based on the ID. This should be done by asking a {{PayloadFactory}} component for a new buffer. A naive implementation might create a new buffer every time, but a more sophisticated one might use a pool of payloads.
> The {{PayloadFactory}} instance could be replaced by one's own implementation; this allows for an application to control the lifecycle of payloads: thus the creation of buffers by the application and of payloads received over the network can be controlled by the same payload management impl.
> h4. Symmetry
> When sending a {{CompositePayload}} of a 500 byte {{ByteArrayPayload}} and a 1000 byte {{NioDirectPayload}}, would we want to also get the same {{CompositePayload}} consisting of 2 payloads on the receiver side, or would we want to combine the 2 payloads into one and make the 2 payloads refer to the same combined byte[] array (or NIO buffer)? Should this be made configurable?
> h4. ObjectPayload
> If ObjectPayload cannot determine the size of the serialized data, it should return {{-1}}. This means that {{Message.setPayload(ObjectPayload)}} would right away serialize {{ObjectPayload}} into {{ByteArrayPayload}}.
> This means we do have the {{byte[]}} array creation (same as now), but for object payloads which do implement {{size()}} correctly, we could still do late serialization.
> h5. ObjectPayload and fragmentation
> {{FRAG3}} could decorate {{ObjectPayload}} with a fragmentation payload, which generates fragments on serialization and sends them down the stack.
> h4. Misc
> * Since this issue includes API changes, the version will be 5.0
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-11566) ConstraintDeclarationException on JAX-RS/EJB Methods with List/Set query parameter
by Tomasz Adamski (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-11566?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Tomasz Adamski commented on WFLY-11566:
---------------------------------------
I have implemented EJB proxy bean normalizer and registered it in Weld:
https://github.com/tadamski/wildfly/tree/WFLY-11566
[~manovotn] could you please take a look whether the implementation is ok from Weld point of view.
[~guillaume.smet] Would you be able to use the provided normalizer?
> ConstraintDeclarationException on JAX-RS/EJB Methods with List/Set query parameter
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-11566
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-11566
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Bean Validation, EJB, REST
> Affects Versions: 14.0.0.Final, 15.0.1.Final
> Reporter: Alexander Wagner
> Assignee: Tomasz Adamski
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: downstream_dependency
> Attachments: WFLY-11566-3.tar
>
>
> You got an exception if you call methods on JAX-RS endpoints which are also e.g. a stateless EJB and have Set or List as query parameters.
> As a workaround we use the "@Context UriInfo info" as parameter an read the parameter manually. As a downside this parameters are missing than in automated api generation with e.g. swagger. Without the @NotEmpty annotation it works fine. Without the generic type parameter ie just List it works fine. Making it a simple CDI bean makes it work fine.
> This issue is caused by [commit - WFLY-9628 Allow to switch to Hibernate Validator 6.0 / Bean Validation 2.0|https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/commit/02f230d91f55f86ee6cadf53832...]
> Steps to reproduce:
> {code:java}
> @Stateless
> @Path("/")
> public class Resource {
> @POST
> @Path("put/list")
> @Consumes(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
> public String putList(@NotEmpty List<String> a) {
> return "Hello bars " + a.stream().collect(Collectors.joining(", "));
> }
> }
> {code}
> {noformat}
> [mkopecky@dhcp-10-40-5-71 bin]$ curl -d '["a","b","c"]' -H "Content-Type: application/json" -X POST http://localhost:8080/jaxrs-wf/put/list
> javax.validation.ConstraintDeclarationException: HV000151: A method overriding another method must not redefine the parameter constraint configuration, but method Resource$$$view1#putList(List) redefines the configuration of Resource#putList(List).
> [mkopecky@dhcp-10-40-5-71 bin]$
> {noformat}
> {noformat}
> javax.validation.ConstraintDeclarationException: HV000151: A method overriding another method must not redefine the parameter constraint configuration, but method Resource$$$view1#putList(List) redefines the configuration of Resource#putList(List).
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.aggregated.rule.OverridingMethodMustNotAlterParameterConstraints.apply(OverridingMethodMustNotAlterParameterConstraints.java:24)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.aggregated.ExecutableMetaData$Builder.assertCorrectnessOfConfiguration(ExecutableMetaData.java:461)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.aggregated.ExecutableMetaData$Builder.build(ExecutableMetaData.java:377)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.aggregated.BeanMetaDataImpl$BuilderDelegate.build(BeanMetaDataImpl.java:788)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.aggregated.BeanMetaDataImpl$BeanMetaDataBuilder.build(BeanMetaDataImpl.java:648)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.BeanMetaDataManager.createBeanMetaData(BeanMetaDataManager.java:192)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.BeanMetaDataManager.lambda$getBeanMetaData$0(BeanMetaDataManager.java:160)
> at java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentMap.computeIfAbsent(ConcurrentMap.java:324)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.metadata.BeanMetaDataManager.getBeanMetaData(BeanMetaDataManager.java:159)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.engine.ValidationContext$ValidationContextBuilder.forValidateParameters(ValidationContext.java:619)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.engine.ValidatorImpl.validateParameters(ValidatorImpl.java:254)
> at org.hibernate.validator.internal.engine.ValidatorImpl.validateParameters(ValidatorImpl.java:224)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.plugins.validation.GeneralValidatorImpl.validateAllParameters(GeneralValidatorImpl.java:177)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.MethodInjectorImpl.invoke(MethodInjectorImpl.java:118)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.ResourceMethodInvoker.internalInvokeOnTarget(ResourceMethodInvoker.java:509)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.ResourceMethodInvoker.invokeOnTargetAfterFilter(ResourceMethodInvoker.java:399)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.ResourceMethodInvoker.lambda$invokeOnTarget$0(ResourceMethodInvoker.java:363)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.interception.PreMatchContainerRequestContext.filter(PreMatchContainerRequestContext.java:355)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.ResourceMethodInvoker.invokeOnTarget(ResourceMethodInvoker.java:365)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.ResourceMethodInvoker.invoke(ResourceMethodInvoker.java:337)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.ResourceMethodInvoker.invoke(ResourceMethodInvoker.java:310)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.SynchronousDispatcher.invoke(SynchronousDispatcher.java:439)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.SynchronousDispatcher.lambda$invoke$4(SynchronousDispatcher.java:229)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.SynchronousDispatcher.lambda$preprocess$0(SynchronousDispatcher.java:135)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.interception.PreMatchContainerRequestContext.filter(PreMatchContainerRequestContext.java:355)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.SynchronousDispatcher.preprocess(SynchronousDispatcher.java:138)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.core.SynchronousDispatcher.invoke(SynchronousDispatcher.java:215)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.plugins.server.servlet.ServletContainerDispatcher.service(ServletContainerDispatcher.java:227)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.plugins.server.servlet.HttpServletDispatcher.service(HttpServletDispatcher.java:56)
> at org.jboss.resteasy.plugins.server.servlet.HttpServletDispatcher.service(HttpServletDispatcher.java:51)
> at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:791)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletHandler.handleRequest(ServletHandler.java:74)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.FilterHandler$FilterChainImpl.doFilter(FilterHandler.java:129)
> at io.opentracing.contrib.jaxrs2.server.SpanFinishingFilter.doFilter(SpanFinishingFilter.java:55)
> at io.undertow.servlet.core.ManagedFilter.doFilter(ManagedFilter.java:61)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.FilterHandler$FilterChainImpl.doFilter(FilterHandler.java:131)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.FilterHandler.handleRequest(FilterHandler.java:84)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.security.ServletSecurityRoleHandler.handleRequest(ServletSecurityRoleHandler.java:62)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletChain$1.handleRequest(ServletChain.java:68)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletDispatchingHandler.handleRequest(ServletDispatchingHandler.java:36)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.security.SecurityContextAssociationHandler.handleRequest(SecurityContextAssociationHandler.java:78)
> at io.undertow.server.handlers.PredicateHandler.handleRequest(PredicateHandler.java:43)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.security.SSLInformationAssociationHandler.handleRequest(SSLInformationAssociationHandler.java:132)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.security.ServletAuthenticationCallHandler.handleRequest(ServletAuthenticationCallHandler.java:57)
> at io.undertow.server.handlers.PredicateHandler.handleRequest(PredicateHandler.java:43)
> at io.undertow.security.handlers.AbstractConfidentialityHandler.handleRequest(AbstractConfidentialityHandler.java:46)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.security.ServletConfidentialityConstraintHandler.handleRequest(ServletConfidentialityConstraintHandler.java:64)
> at io.undertow.security.handlers.AuthenticationMechanismsHandler.handleRequest(AuthenticationMechanismsHandler.java:60)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.security.CachedAuthenticatedSessionHandler.handleRequest(CachedAuthenticatedSessionHandler.java:77)
> at io.undertow.security.handlers.NotificationReceiverHandler.handleRequest(NotificationReceiverHandler.java:50)
> at io.undertow.security.handlers.AbstractSecurityContextAssociationHandler.handleRequest(AbstractSecurityContextAssociationHandler.java:43)
> at io.undertow.server.handlers.PredicateHandler.handleRequest(PredicateHandler.java:43)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.security.jacc.JACCContextIdHandler.handleRequest(JACCContextIdHandler.java:61)
> at io.undertow.server.handlers.PredicateHandler.handleRequest(PredicateHandler.java:43)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.deployment.GlobalRequestControllerHandler.handleRequest(GlobalRequestControllerHandler.java:68)
> at io.undertow.server.handlers.PredicateHandler.handleRequest(PredicateHandler.java:43)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletInitialHandler.handleFirstRequest(ServletInitialHandler.java:292)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletInitialHandler.access$100(ServletInitialHandler.java:81)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletInitialHandler$2.call(ServletInitialHandler.java:138)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletInitialHandler$2.call(ServletInitialHandler.java:135)
> at io.undertow.servlet.core.ServletRequestContextThreadSetupAction$1.call(ServletRequestContextThreadSetupAction.java:48)
> at io.undertow.servlet.core.ContextClassLoaderSetupAction$1.call(ContextClassLoaderSetupAction.java:43)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.security.SecurityContextThreadSetupAction.lambda$create$0(SecurityContextThreadSetupAction.java:105)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.deployment.UndertowDeploymentInfoService$UndertowThreadSetupAction.lambda$create$0(UndertowDeploymentInfoService.java:1502)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.deployment.UndertowDeploymentInfoService$UndertowThreadSetupAction.lambda$create$0(UndertowDeploymentInfoService.java:1502)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.deployment.UndertowDeploymentInfoService$UndertowThreadSetupAction.lambda$create$0(UndertowDeploymentInfoService.java:1502)
> at org.wildfly.extension.undertow.deployment.UndertowDeploymentInfoService$UndertowThreadSetupAction.lambda$create$0(UndertowDeploymentInfoService.java:1502)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletInitialHandler.dispatchRequest(ServletInitialHandler.java:272)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletInitialHandler.access$000(ServletInitialHandler.java:81)
> at io.undertow.servlet.handlers.ServletInitialHandler$1.handleRequest(ServletInitialHandler.java:104)
> at io.undertow.server.Connectors.executeRootHandler(Connectors.java:360)
> at io.undertow.server.HttpServerExchange$1.run(HttpServerExchange.java:830)
> at org.jboss.threads.ContextClassLoaderSavingRunnable.run(ContextClassLoaderSavingRunnable.java:35)
> at org.jboss.threads.EnhancedQueueExecutor.safeRun(EnhancedQueueExecutor.java:1985)
> at org.jboss.threads.EnhancedQueueExecutor$ThreadBody.doRunTask(EnhancedQueueExecutor.java:1487)
> at org.jboss.threads.EnhancedQueueExecutor$ThreadBody.run(EnhancedQueueExecutor.java:1378)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
> {noformat}
> Links:
> * [forum|https://developer.jboss.org/thread/278822]
> * WFLY-11566
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-2426) JChannel: remove stats
by Bela Ban (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/JGRP-2426?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Bela Ban resolved JGRP-2426.
----------------------------
Resolution: Done
> JChannel: remove stats
> ----------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-2426
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/JGRP-2426
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Enhancement
> Reporter: Bela Ban
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Priority: Optional
> Fix For: 5.0
>
>
> Remove stats such as {{sent_msgs, received_msgs, sent_bytes, received_bytes}} from JChannel. It may be costly to maintain those stats (e.g. {{Message.getLength()}} in 5.0), and they're already maintained by the transport (or {{STATS}}).
> For ForkChannels, these stats would be gone, too, and would not be maintained for each fork channel separately...
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (JGRP-2218) New payload interface
by Bela Ban (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/JGRP-2218?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Bela Ban commented on JGRP-2218:
--------------------------------
[~pruivo] Sorry for the delay (+1 year!) :-)
Why did you write a custom message? Was the {{BytesMessage}} not good enough? {{BackUpMessage} doesn't carry a lot of data, so IMO {{BytesMessage}} could have been used.
Or was the idea to see how easy it was to implement a custom message?
> New payload interface
> ---------------------
>
> Key: JGRP-2218
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/JGRP-2218
> Project: JGroups
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Reporter: Bela Ban
> Assignee: Bela Ban
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 5.0
>
> Attachments: jgrp-2218.jfr, master.jfr
>
>
> h3. Goal
> Change payload in {{Message}} from byte[] arrays to a {{Payload}} interface which can have multiple implementations.
> h3. Reason
> Currently, having to pass a byte[] array to a message leads to unnecessary copying:
> * When an application has a ref to an NIO (direct) {{ByteBuffer}}, the bytes in the byte buffer have to be copied into a byte[] array and then set in the message
> * When the application sends around byte[] arrays, but also wants to add some additional metadata, e.g. type (1000-byte requests/responses), it needs to create a new byte[] array of (say) 1001 bytes and copy the data (1000 bytes) plus the request type (1 byte) into the new copy. Example: {{MPerf}} and {{UPerf}}
> * When an object has to be sent (e.g. in Infinispan), the object has to be marshalled into a byte[] array (first allocation) and then added to the message. With the suggested {{ObjectPayload}} (below), marshalling of the object would occur late, and it would be marshalled directly into the output stream of the bundler, eliminating the byte[] array allocation made by the application.
> h3. Design
> Instead of copying, the application creates an instance of {{Payload}} and sets the payload in {{Message}}. The {{Payload}} is then passed all the way down into the transport where it is marshalled and sent. There can be a number of payload implementations, e.g.
> * {{ByteArrayPayload}}: wraps a byte[] array with an offset and length
> * {{NioDirectPayload}}: wraps an NIO direct {{ByteBuffer}}
> * {{NioHeapPayload}}: wraps an NIO heap-based {{ByteBuffer}}
> * {{CompositePayload}}: wraps multiple Buffers. E.g. type (1 byte) and data (1000 bytes) as described above
> * {{IntPayload}}: a single integer
> * {{ObjectPayload}}: has an Object and a ClassLoader (for reading), plus a Marshaller which know how to marshal the object, this allows for objects to be passed in payloads and they're only marshalled at the end (transport).
> * {{PartialPayload}}: a ref to a {{Payload}}, with an offset and length
> * {{InputStreamPayload}}: has a ref to an input stream and copies data from input- to output stream when marshalling
> The {{Payload}} interface has methods:
> * {{size()}}
> * {{writeTo(DataOutput)}}
> * {{readFrom(DataInput)}}
> * {{getInput()}}: this provides a {{DataInput}} stream for reading from the underlying payload
> and possibly also
> * {{acquire()}} and
> * {{release()}} (for ref-counting)
> * {{copy()}}
> Each payload impl has an ID and it should be possible to register new impls. A {{PayloadFactory}} maintains a mapping between IDs and impl classes.
> When marshalling a {{Payload}}, the ID is written first, followed by the payload's {{writeTo()}} method. When reading payloads, the {{PayloadFactory}} is used to create instances from IDs.
> h4. Fragmentation
> When fragmenting a buffer, the fragments are instances of {{PartialPayload}} which maintains an offset and length over an underlying payload. When marshalling a {{PartialPayload}}, only the part between offset and offset+length is written to the output stream.
> For fragmentation, method {{size()}} is crucial to determine whether a payload needs to be fragmented, or not. If, for example, a payload (e.g. an {{ObjectPayload}}) cannot determine the correct size, it may return {{-1}}. This leads to the {{ObjectPayload}} getting marshalled right away and getting wrapped into a {{ByteArrayPayload}}. So if {{size()}} cannot be determined, we have exactly the same behavior as what's currently done.
> h4. Reference counting
> If we implement ref-counting, then payloads can be reused as soon as the ref-count is 0. For example, when sending a message, the payload's ref-count could be incremented by the app calling {{acquire()}}. (Assuming the message is a unicast message), {{UNICAST3}} would increment the count to 2. This is needed because {{UNICAST3}} might have to retransmit the message if it was lost on the network, and meanwhile the payload cannot be reused (changed). The app calls {{release()}} when the {{JChannel.send()}} call returns, but the payload cannot be reused until {{UNICAST3}} calls {{release()}} as well. This will happen when an {{ACK}} for the given message has been received.
> h4. Payload factory
> When a request is received, the buffer is created from the bytes received on the network, based on the ID. This should be done by asking a {{PayloadFactory}} component for a new buffer. A naive implementation might create a new buffer every time, but a more sophisticated one might use a pool of payloads.
> The {{PayloadFactory}} instance could be replaced by one's own implementation; this allows for an application to control the lifecycle of payloads: thus the creation of buffers by the application and of payloads received over the network can be controlled by the same payload management impl.
> h4. Symmetry
> When sending a {{CompositePayload}} of a 500 byte {{ByteArrayPayload}} and a 1000 byte {{NioDirectPayload}}, would we want to also get the same {{CompositePayload}} consisting of 2 payloads on the receiver side, or would we want to combine the 2 payloads into one and make the 2 payloads refer to the same combined byte[] array (or NIO buffer)? Should this be made configurable?
> h4. ObjectPayload
> If ObjectPayload cannot determine the size of the serialized data, it should return {{-1}}. This means that {{Message.setPayload(ObjectPayload)}} would right away serialize {{ObjectPayload}} into {{ByteArrayPayload}}.
> This means we do have the {{byte[]}} array creation (same as now), but for object payloads which do implement {{size()}} correctly, we could still do late serialization.
> h5. ObjectPayload and fragmentation
> {{FRAG3}} could decorate {{ObjectPayload}} with a fragmentation payload, which generates fragments on serialization and sends them down the stack.
> h4. Misc
> * Since this issue includes API changes, the version will be 5.0
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFWIP-297) Base64 encoded JWKS from a file fails to resolve
by Darran Lofthouse (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFWIP-297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Darran Lofthouse commented on WFWIP-297:
----------------------------------------
The error is a little confusing, the specification requires the implementation to attempt to load as a pem before it gets to Base64 decoding so the message logged is just for information.
> Base64 encoded JWKS from a file fails to resolve
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFWIP-297
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFWIP-297
> Project: WildFly WIP
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: MP JWT
> Reporter: Jan Kasik
> Assignee: Darran Lofthouse
> Priority: Blocker
>
> JWKS supplied through {{mp.jwt.verify.publickey.location}} fails to resolve when encoded to Base64 string. Seems like the SmallRye is trying to parse the file content as a PEM key. See excerpt from log.
> This breaks specification compatibility because according to MP-JWT 1.1 which specifies in section 9.2.3:
> {quote}
> The JWKS may be supplied in plain JSON or Base64 URL encoded JSON format.
> {quote}
> {code}
> 12:04:02,323 DEBUG [io.smallrye.jwt.config.JWTAuthContextInfoProvider] (default task-1) init, mpJwtPublicKey=NONE, mpJwtIssuer=issuer, mpJwtLocation=META-INF/keys.jwks
> ...
> 12:04:02,326 DEBUG [io.smallrye.jwt.auth.principal.KeyLocationResolver] (default task-1) Trying to create a key from the encoded PEM key...
> 12:04:02,326 DEBUG [io.smallrye.jwt.auth.principal.KeyLocationResolver] (default task-1) Failed to create a key from the encoded PEM key: java.security.spec.InvalidKeySpecException: java.security.InvalidKeyException: invalid key format
> at sun.security.rsa.RSAKeyFactory.engineGeneratePublic(RSAKeyFactory.java:205)
> ...
> Caused by: org.jose4j.jwt.consumer.InvalidJwtException: JWT processing failed. Additional details: [[17] Unable to process JOSE object (cause: org.jose4j.lang.UnresolvableKeyException: Failed to resolve a key from: META-INF/keys.jwks): JsonWebSignature{"kid":"blue-key","typ":"JWT","alg":"RS256"}->eyJraWQiOiJibHVlLWtleSIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCIsImFsZyI6IlJTMjU2In0=.eyJqdGkiOiJmMjc2YjVhYS0zMGZiLTQ4MWEtYjk0MS0xNDJhNjBmMGZiNjMiLCJzdWIiOiJGQUtFX1VTRVIiLCJncm91cHMiOlsiZ3JvdXAyIiwiZ3JvdXAxIl0sImF1ZCI6Im1pY3JvcHJvZmlsZS1qd3QtdGVzdHN1aXRlIiwiaXNzIjoiaXNzdWVyIiwiaWF0IjoxNTc4NjU0MjQxLCJleHAiOjE1Nzg2NTc4NDEsInVwbiI6IkZBS0VfVVNFUiIsInByZWZlcnJlZF91c2VybmFtZSI6IkZBS0VfVVNFUiJ9.AEe5kEr0s2p4CDbqwHPRwLziktwABX0OmM2aCEgdUF71eXlCu72ZhwNYDac3NyXMNhWp7k_xxX0I20EIbwBQsiJFmQZgqXZuK44Kc3jnMWDHT8kdPU03G3rIZBA2aiYsVy2gZ67gG_VnFx453fqHOxBIXtDsy1mzdrHwHLgY5iOklAodlv0Oe-H2Qik8oEj_k2R0a9b9E9pu7RHkono1d8TIuufwuJOIv7QSSo9w5vC74mYvd_RhZKvLACLx4ry9KVWamtDp_hMpclAqeUCjvcL-2VMI1VaDE3ZE7XonNMbCjwjxLzTtRLwVZAoYiD3eXSYkFTLGUT4BtfE8P5B3Uvb6pjf50e_EgYePAwvY-PFBFPB54BWcO433B3Pk411XYHUZweQfMHumateCwPJXZXcCoWjGj8ujHH3Leje_9gswzxDxd0JI2zjJEwasTBMixC65Jz9W5lKwQVVTHULP49KIbRXFkU52gTizMZNaABSGI48naMHr0Xu42yDKSrwkJTO3zNW1kSVi-3BMU6fmUxK8BF3xy2VgDgg_Rpmx_eQCBrGE36J-swHZbAPmiMKYT96D3rZHcMHa1oj784Em_h1p3sfr27ZCd0vpO7rOmHWzk1SWnb5GkySuuedwBQL-K5VT3mytqwFOg_UXZMkxSEGbn37WRzMa2KxfXKgRA-A=]
> at org.jose4j.jwt.consumer.JwtConsumer.processContext(JwtConsumer.java:271)
> at org.jose4j.jwt.consumer.JwtConsumer.process(JwtConsumer.java:433)
> at io.smallrye.jwt.auth.principal.DefaultJWTTokenParser.parse(DefaultJWTTokenParser.java:88)
> ... 40 more
> Caused by: org.jose4j.lang.UnresolvableKeyException: Failed to resolve a key from: META-INF/keys.jwks
> at io.smallrye.jwt.auth.principal.KeyLocationResolver.resolveKey(KeyLocationResolver.java:101)
> at org.jose4j.jwt.consumer.JwtConsumer.processContext(JwtConsumer.java:213)
> ... 42 more
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 6 months
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-4925) forall pattern with date constraint fail to match
by Mario Fusco (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4925?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ]
Mario Fusco updated DROOLS-4925:
--------------------------------
Sprint: 2020 Week 01-03 (from Dec 30)
> forall pattern with date constraint fail to match
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-4925
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-4925
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core engine
> Affects Versions: 7.29.0.Final, 7.30.0.Final, 7.31.0.Final
> Reporter: Matteo Casalino
> Assignee: Mario Fusco
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: forall-date-constraint.tgz, network.png
>
>
> As of Drools 7.29.0.Final, {{forall}} patterns containing equality constraints on dates won't match as expected.
> For instance, given the following drl
> {noformat}
> declare Fact
> d : java.util.Date
> end
>
> rule "forall with date"
> when
> forall(Fact(d == "01-Jan-2020"))
> then
> end
> {noformat}
> and the following working memory:
> {noformat}
> Fact( d=Wed Jan 01 00:00:00 CET 2020 )
> Fact( d=Wed Jan 01 00:00:00 CET 2020 )
> Fact( d=Wed Jan 01 00:00:00 CET 2020 )
> {noformat}
> Drools <= 7.28.0.Final will fire 1 rule, whereas Drools >= 7.29.0.Final will fire 0 rules.
> This is probably due to the fact that the rewriting implemented in [DROOLS-4632] fails to negate the constraint on the date, as visible in the attached picture of the network.
> I am wondering whether there would be an equivalent problem with any constraint on dates (e.g., >=, <=, ...)?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
6 years, 6 months