Hi Jasha,

I checked. It did indeed solve the problem!

regards,
Matthijs

Op 13-4-2012 10:37, Jasha Joachimsthal schreef:
> Hi Matthijs,
>
> I was unable to reproduce or isolate your issue. If I set a timeout
> manually in the database, a new OAuth token was negotiated with Google and
> a new record was inserted into the database.
> Other Services in Apache Rave that do a delete in the database seem to do
> that in a separate transaction, but the DefaultOAuthTokenInfoService
> didn't. I just added that separate transaction to the trunk
> (0.11-SNAPSHOT). Can you check if this solves your issue? If so I'll close
> [1]
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-559
>
> Jasha Joachimsthal
>
> Europe - Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam - +31(0)20 522 4466
> US - Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142 - +1 877 414 4776 (toll free)
>
> www.onehippo.com
>
>
> On 12 April 2012 16:19, Matthijs de Vries <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I am testing a new Open Social gadget using the Rave platform.
>>
>> This gadget uses OAuth. This works fine while the OAuth token is still
>> valid.
>> When the OAuth provider decides the token is not valid any more Rave
>> doesn't negotiate a new token.
>>
>> It seems Rave tries to remove the old token but when this fails the
>> entire process is broken off
>> (DefaultOAuthTokenInfoService.deleteOAuthTokenInfo).
>>
>> ===========================================================================
>> <openjpa-2.1.1-r422266:1148538 nonfatal user error>
>> org.apache.openjpa.persistence.ArgumentException: You cannot perform
>> operation delete on detached object
>> "org.apache.rave.gadgets.oauth.model.OAuthTokenInfo-3". This operation
>> only applies to managed objects.
>> FailedObject: org.apache.rave.gadgets.oauth.model.OAuthTokenInfo-3
>> ===========================================================================
>>
>> When the token is removed manually from the table "OAUTH_TOKEN_INFO" the
>> process works fine until the token is invalidated again.
>>
>> Is this a known issue?
>>
>> kind regards,
>> Matthijs de Vries
>>
>>

Reply via email to