Search Results

Search found 9 results on 1 pages for 'prmatta'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• can a valid xml body have escaped characters for the '<' and '>' around the element names

  - by prmatta

  My web service is receiving xml from a third party that looks like this: <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"> <SOAP-ENV:Body> &lt;Foo&gt;bar&lt;/Foo&gt; </SOAP-ENV:Body> </SOAP-ENV:Envelope> My jaxws web service rejects this with a parsing error. Also if I try to validate this xml using soapui it says Body with element-only content type cannot have text element. My question is, is that xml valid? Or is the client supposed to send me something without escaping the < and . Any references to xml standards or rules are appreciated.

  Read the article

• include external jar when running java -jar

  - by prmatta

  From my readings, when you execute a command as follows: java -jar foo.jar Then the main classpath is ignored and the classpath is taken from the manifest file. Further, the classpath declared on the command line is also ignored. So in: java -classpath /usr/local/jar/foobar.jar -jar foo.jar /usr/local/jar/foobar.jar is ignored. Lastly, I have read that the manifest file can only only contain relative paths, within the jar file. So, how do you include absolute paths to external jars, that are present on the system, but not in the jar file being executed?

  Read the article

• how to view internal jaxws logs in tomcat

  - by prmatta

  I have a web service that is deployed in tomcat, and it is rejecting a soap request over https. However, I can't see any logs as to why it is doing so. I have the following set in my service endpoint implementation file: System.setProperty("javax.net.debug", "all"); System.setProperty("java.security.debug", "all"); And I pass the following parameters to tomcat: -Dcom.sun.xml.ws.transport.http.HttpAdapter.dump=true -Dcom.sun.xml.ws.transport.http.client.HttpTransportPipe.dump=true Is there anything else I need to do to see the internal jaxws logs? Are there some other loggers I need to enable?

  Read the article

• what happens to running/blocked runnables when executorservice is shutdown()

  - by prmatta

  I posted a question about a thread pattern today, and almost everyone suggested that I look into the ExecutorService. While I was looking into the ExecutorService, I think I am missing something. What happens if the service has a running or blocked threads, and someone calls ExecutorService.shutdown(). What happens to threads that are running or blocked? Does the ExecutorService wait for those threads to complete before it terminates? The reason I ask this is because a long time ago when I used to dabble in Java, they deprecated Thread.stop(), and I remember the right way of stopping a thread was to use sempahores and extend Thread when necessary: public void run () { while (!this.exit) { try { block(); //do something } catch (InterruptedException ie) { } } } public void stop () { this.exit = true; if (this.thread != null) { this.thread.interrupt(); this.thread = null; } } How does ExecutorService handle running threads?

  Read the article

• stop thread that does not get interrupted

  - by prmatta

  I have a thread that sits and reads objects off of an ObjectInputStream: public void run() { try { ois = new ObjectInputStream(clientSocket.getInputStream()); Object o; while ((o = ois.readObject()) != null) { //do something with object } } catch (Exception ex) { //Log exception } } readObject does not throw InterruptedException and as far as I can tell, no exception is thrown when this thread is interrupted. How do I stop this thread?

  Read the article

• how to share a variable between two threads

  - by prmatta

  I just inherited some code, two threads within this code need to perform a system task. One thread should do the system task before the other thread. They should not be performing the system task together. The two threads do not have references to each other. Now, I know I can use some sort of a semaphore to achieve this. But my question is what is the right way to get both threads to access this semaphore. I could create a static variable/method a new class : public class SharedSemaphore { private static Semaphore s = new Semaphore (1, true); public static void performSystemTask () { s.acquire(); } public static void donePerformingSystemTask() { s.release(); } } This would work (right?) but this doesn't seem like the right thing to do. Because, the threads now have access to a semaphore, without ever having a reference to it. This sort of thing doesn't seem like a good programming practice. Am I wrong?

  Read the article

• SELECT only a certain set of rows at a time

  - by prmatta

  I need to select data from one table and insert it into another table. Currently the SQL looks something like this: INSERT INTO A (x, y, z) SELECT x, y, z FROM B b WHERE ... However, the SELECT is huge, resulting in over 2 millions rows and we think it is taking up too much memory. Informix, the db in this case, runs out of virtual memory when the query is run. How would I go about selecting and inserting a set of rows (say 2000)? Given that I don't think there are any row ids etc.

  Read the article

• which sql consumes less memory

  - by prmatta

  Yesterday I asked a question on how to re-write sql to do selects and inserts in batches. I needed to do this to try and consume less virtual memory, since I need to move millions of rows here. The object is to move rows from Table B into Table A. Here are the ways I can think of doing this: SQL #1) INSERT INTO A (x, y, z) SELECT x, y, z FROM B b WHERE ... SQL #2) FOREACH SELECT x,y,z FROM B b WHERE ... INSERT INTO A(x,y,z); END FOREACH; SQL #3) FOREACH SELECT FIRST 2000 x,y,z FROM B b WHERE ... INSERT INTO A(x,y,z); END FOREACH; SQL #4) FOREACH SELECT FIRST 2000 x,y,z FROM B b WHERE ... AND NOT EXISTS IN (SELECT * FROM A) INSERT INTO A(x,y,z); END FOREACH; Are any of the above incorrect? The database is informix 11.5.

  Read the article

• does anyone see any issues with this thread pattern?

  - by prmatta

  Here is a simple thread pattern that I use when writing a class that needs just one thread, and needs to a specific task. The usual requirements for such a class are that it should be startable, stopable and restartable. Does anyone see any issues with this pattern that I use? public class MyThread implements Runnable { private boolean _exit = false; private Thread _thread = null; public void start () { if (_thread == null) { _thread = new Thread(this, "MyThread"); _thread.start(); } } public void run () { while (_exit) { //do something } } public void stop () { _exit = true; if (_thread != null) { _thread.interrupt(); _thread = null; } } } I am looking for comments around if I am missing something, or if there is a better way to write this.

  Read the article

1