I have Feign client setup with Hystrix and I am trying to log all the HTTP status codes that I get from my API calls into a database. So this means, if one of my calls give me a 201, I would want to log that into DB. If my call results in a failure, my fallback handler can obviously log that but I want to do the DB inserts in one place. Does feign have a way to get access to responses or some kind of general callback?
You have to provide custom decoder to get your response in ResponseEntity<Object>.
NotificationClient notificationClient = Feign.builder()
.encoder(new JacksonEncoder())
.decoder(customDecoder())
.target(Target.EmptyTarget.create(NotificationClient.class));
Here you define your custom decoder bean. You can define your own by implementing Decoder but I'm using spring decoder.
#Bean
public Decoder customDecoder() {
HttpMessageConverter jacksonConverter = new MappingJackson2HttpMessageConverter(customObjectMapper());
ObjectFactory<HttpMessageConverters> objectFactory = () -> new HttpMessageConverters(jacksonConverter);
return new ResponseEntityDecoder(new SpringDecoder(objectFactory));
}
Now collect your response in ResponseEntity<Object>
ResponseEntity<Object> response = notificationClient.notify();
int status = response.getStatusCodeValue();
Another option is to create your own feign.Logger implementation, overriding the logAndRebufferResponse method:
protected Response logAndRebufferResponse(
String configKey, Level logLevel, Response response, long elapsedTime);
This may be simpler than creating a Decoder and is guaranteed to be called when a response is received regardless of status. Decoders are only called if the request does not trigger an error.
Related
I need to create a reverse proxy that takes incoming request and based on the content of the request body, route the request to specific URI.
This is for a routing micro service that acts like a reverse proxy and does routing based on some information from each request body. This means for each request I need to parse the request body and get the "username" field and then make a JDBC connection to fetch additional information from the database. Based on that information in database, it would finally redirect the request to the correct URI.
From what I have now, I have 2 blocking methods. The first one is the parsing for the request body, the other one is the JDBC connection to the database. I understand that I should not put any blocking calls inside the gateway filter. I just don't know what I should do in this case. I could have both operations running async but in the end I still need the information from database to do routing.
#Bean
public RouteLocator apiLocator(RouteLocatorBuilder builder, XmlMapper xmlMapper) {
return builder.routes()
.route(r -> r
.path("/test")
.and()
.readBody(String.class, s -> true) // Read the request body, data will be cached as cachedRequestBodyObject
.filters(f -> f.filter(new GatewayFilter() {
#Override
public Mono<Void> filter(ServerWebExchange exchange, GatewayFilterChain chain) {
try {
// The following method is blocking and should not be put here
xmlMapper.readValue((String) exchange.getAttribute("cachedRequestBodyObject"), Map.class);
} catch (Exception e) {
//TODO
}
return chain.filter(exchange);
}
}))
.uri("http://localhost:8080"))
.build();
}
The above example only includes the blocking parsing as my request body is XML based. My IDE is warning me of having a blocking call there which I really appreciate.
Any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you everyone!
After some research, Mono.fromCallable seems to be a good fit. I then asked the same question directly under the github repo, it turns out that using a servlet app may be better. For anyone who is interested to see what I came up with, please take a look here https://github.com/spring-cloud/spring-cloud-gateway/issues/1229
I am using Jersey Rest implementation. There are one Rest Services Called HelloWorld. See the below code.
Please consider this code as reference not as compiled code.
#Path("helloWorld")
public class HelloWorld{
#Path("test")
#Produces(...)
#Consum(...)
#GET
public Response test(Person person){
System.out.println(person);
}
}
I am using Jersey client to sent the request.
Here My question is apart from POST method is there any way to send the object to GET method directly. Instead of QueryString.
Please let me if there is any way to do so.
Thanks
So the problem shouldn't be with the server. I did a few tests on different servers (not weblogic as I don't use it) and all of them seem to have no problems accepting a body in the GET request. The problem seem to be with the client. To test I used the following code
ClientBuilder.newClient()
.target("http://localhost:8080/api/get-body")
.property(ClientProperties.SUPPRESS_HTTP_COMPLIANCE_VALIDATION, true)
.request()
.method(HttpMethod.GET, Entity.text("Hello World"));
The SUPPRESS_HTTP_COMPLIANCE_VALIDATION allows us to pass a body to the request. If we didn't use this, then we would get an error.
The problem with this code, is that even though we set this override property, the client completely overrides the GET method and automatically makes it a POST method, so I would get back a 405 Method Not Allowed.
The solution I came up with is to just allow the client to set a header, e.g. X-GET-BODY-OVERRIDE, and then use a #PreMatching filter on the server side to check for this header. If the header is present, then just change the method to a GET
#Provider
#PreMatching
public class GetWithBodyFilter implements ContainerRequestFilter {
#Override
public void filter(ContainerRequestContext request) throws IOException {
String getOverride = request.getHeaderString("X-GET-BODY-OVERRIDE");
if (getOverride != null && "true".equalsIgnoreCase(getOverride)) {
request.setMethod(HttpMethod.GET);
}
}
}
Then just register the filter with the server side. On the client, you would simply need to add the header
ClientBuilder.newClient()
.target("http://localhost:8080/api/get-body")
.property(ClientProperties.SUPPRESS_HTTP_COMPLIANCE_VALIDATION, true)
.request()
.header("X-GET-BODY-OVERRIDE", "True")
.method(HttpMethod.GET, Entity.text("Hello World"));
This solution is good because it takes into account more than just the Jersey client, in regards with being able to send a body in the GET request.
As a Spring Boot noob, I just know that in the controller class, its public functions can return both model objects and ResponseEntity object. Something like
public List<Book> getBooks() {}
or
public ResponseEntity<Book> getBooks() {}
But my question is which is better when there are multiple choices?
Basically, you have control over the HTTP response status if you use ResponseEntity, in addition to the content of the object itself.
public ResponseEntity<Object> getObject() {
return new ResponseEntity<Object>(object, Httpstatus.OK);
}
For example, if you need to validate some data from the request before executing any action and you want to let your client know what happened through the HTTP status code you can choose between different options.
HttpStatus.CONFLICT
HttpStatus.CREATED
Here you can take a look on the different status codes:
HTTP Status Codes
Just to shed more light on what #lbpeppers has mentioned. Using a ResponseEntity has many advantages.
1. The client need not look into the body of the message if the status code is something like 400 or 404, which is quite helpful
2. In some cases the client is not interested in the body. All it needs is a status of the operation
3. There are a lot of handy methods like is1xxInformational, is2xxSuccessful, is3xxRedirection, is4xxClientError, is5xxServerError in HttpStatus calss which can be used like
response.getStatusCode().is2xxSuccessful()
Is it a good idea to always use Response as a return type for all your REST services.
For example, let's say I have a method that gets all customers
First way:
public List <customer> getAllCustomers(){
// select all customers from database
}
Second Way:
public Response getAllCustomers(){
// user Response.ResponseBuilder.entity(customer)
}
enter code here
Which is a better approach. Is is advisable for all methods to return Response as return type (as in the Second way).
I would create your own response object. This will let you pass information to the client about the operation, number of records updated, error messages, etc. Also your service will behave consistently to your clients.
I would say you do not have to return any response data, but you should set your HTTP response codes appropriately. Like setting a 204 (No Content) response code for a simple acknowledgement of an operation.
I have to consume a service provided by one of our partners. I was given little direction, but was told the security was to be PasswordDigest. I looked it up and immediatly saw lots of references to WSE, so off I went. It was very easy to implement and in no time I had a standard WSE user token using PasswordDigest sitting in the SOAP headers of my messages.
When we started testing today I was immediatly told (by the error message) that things weren't right. Turns out, out partner doesn't look in the SOAP header, but rather wants the security info in the http header.
I have seen lots of articles on how to add custom http headers to a proxy class, but my proxy inherits from SoapHttpClientProtocol which doesn't have a headers collection to add to. I was looking at making a raw httpWebRequest, but I have a specific method to access that has some complex parameters to deal with (and besides it feels like going backwords).
What is the best way to add custom http headers to a service proxy class that doesn't have a GetWebRequest method?
For reference:
Proxy class decleration:
[System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("System.Web.Services", "2.0.50727.3053")]
[System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepThroughAttribute()]
[System.ComponentModel.DesignerCategoryAttribute("code")]
[System.Web.Services.WebServiceBindingAttribute(Name="MtomServiceSoap11", namespace="http://ws.xxxxxxx.com/")]
public partial class MtomServiceService : System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol {
Target method I need to call:
[System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapDocumentMethodAttribute("", Use=System.Web.Services.Description.SoapBindingUse.Literal, ParameterStyle=System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapParameterStyle.Bare)]
[return: System.Xml.Serialization.XmlElementAttribute("uploadDocumentResponse", Namespace="http://ws.edsmtom.citizensfla.com/")]
public uploadDocumentResponse uploadDocument([System.Xml.Serialization.XmlElementAttribute(Namespace="http://ws.xxxxxxx.com/")] uploadDocumentRequest uploadDocumentRequest) {
object[] results = this.Invoke("uploadDocument", new object[] {
uploadDocumentRequest});
return ((uploadDocumentResponse)(results[0]));
}
}
The actual call to the Service is simple. The objects being pass in are not:
request.criteria = docCriteria;
request.document = document;
var result = service.uploadDocument(request);
Thanks.
It figures that 30 minutes after posting I would stumble across the answer. While the proxy class decelaration does not create a GetWebRequest method, its base class System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol has it and it can be overridden.
protected override System.Net.WebRequest GetWebRequest(Uri uri)
{
var request = base.GetWebRequest(uri);
request.Headers.Add("blah", "blah"); // <----
return request;
}