On Mar 12, 2013, at 6:40 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'd like to double-check something,
>
> When MBW throws an exception which gets mapped, the response will be routed via the available response filters and/or writers, is that correct ?
>
Yes, see 6.7. Also note that exceptions are mapped only once during a request/response processing lifecycle.
-- Santiago
> On 04/02/13 12:08, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>> On 04/02/13 12:05, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>>
>>> On Feb 4, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Sergey Beryozkin<sberyozkin_at_talend.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/02/13 16:42, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>>>> I see what you mean. Feel free to file a Jira issue so that we can
>>>>> consider it in 2.1 timeframe.
>>>> Sounds good, will do.
>>>>
>>>> By the way, AFAIK, MBW can also throw the exception, and the process
>>>> is similar, if the exception is mapped then feed Response to MBW
>>>> again and if MBW throws it again - propagate to the container.
>>>>
>>>> I'm assuming that the filters throwing exceptions and then processing
>>>> mapped responses does not affect the related MBW process, so
>>>> effectively we can have the exceptions thrown and mapped twice on the
>>>> server response chain, once by filters, next by MBW.
>>>>
>>>> Or, actually, 3 times ?
>>>>
>>>> Filters, then possibly WriterInterceptor and finally - MBW ?
>>>
>>> No, the idea is to only re-map exception once. So, in general, no
>>> matter where the exception comes from, if causes another exception,
>>> the exception will be propagated to container.
>>>
>> OK, makes sense
>>
>> Sergey
>>
>>
>>> Marek
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Sergey
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>> Marek
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 1, 2013, at 5:24 PM, Sergey Beryozkin<sberyozkin_at_talend.com
>>>>> <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I agree it makes sense in most cases to support it.
>>>>>> I think there could be some issues though like double logging or
>>>>>> similar, etc, when the response filter which throws the exception has
>>>>>> been prioritized to be after such filters like logging one, etc.
>>>>>> The user might see for example from the in& out loggers:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Request: a
>>>>>> Response: aResponse
>>>>>> Response: aResponse2 or even aResponse
>>>>>>
>>>>>> May be it is negligible this issue. Perhaps it can make sense to
>>>>>> consider adding an annotation like @NonReentrant or similar either for
>>>>>> 2.0 or 2.1 if the group agrees it can be warranted. I'm easy either
>>>>>> way
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers. Sergey
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>