Bug 779374 (SOA-1764)

Summary:	NullAction shipped with the SOA-P
Product:	[JBoss] JBoss Enterprise SOA Platform 5	Reporter:	Jim Tyrrell <jtyrrell>
Component:	JBossESB, Distribution	Assignee:	Default User <jbpapp-maint>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	5.0.0 ER5
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	FUTURE
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
URL:	http://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/SOA-1764
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-04-08 20:09:09 UTC	Type:	Feature Request
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Jim Tyrrell 2010-01-04 02:04:33 UTC

Date of First Response: 2010-01-04 10:49:59
project_key: SOA

Two different customers have for testing/performance purposes have produced create their own NullAction, I have even produced one while messing around.  We should include a NullAction as part of the standard set of Actions.

Comment 1 Kevin Conner 2010-01-04 15:49:59 UTC

There are two options for this at present

- don't declare any "actions" element on the service and you have a service which returns the incoming message as a response
- use the EchoRouter as your null action.  The EchoRouter does log at INFO though (not sure why) so this would need to be disabled if testing performance.

Comment 2 Kevin Conner 2010-01-04 16:07:59 UTC

To disable the logging it would be necessary to change jboss-log4j.xml and add the following

   <category name="org.jboss.soa.esb.actions.routing.EchoRouter">
      <priority value="WARN"/>
   </category>

Comment 3 Kevin Conner 2010-01-04 16:14:56 UTC

The first suggestion is not applicable as there is an explicit check in the pipeline preventing a 'naked' pipeline from being configured.

Comment 4 Jim Tyrrell 2010-01-12 14:58:38 UTC

Link: Added: This issue related JBIDE-5637

Comment 5 Anne-Louise Tangring 2010-09-21 18:56:01 UTC

This was triaged for SOA 5.1.0. It is not in 5.1.0