Skip to content

Use proper priority to deploy Vert.x Filter used for legacy websockets #48883

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 11, 2025
Merged

Use proper priority to deploy Vert.x Filter used for legacy websockets #48883

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion ...r/deployment/src/main/java/io/quarkus/websockets/deployment/ServerWebSocketProcessor.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -110,10 +110,11 @@ public FilterBuildItem deploy(final CombinedIndexBuildItem indexBuildItem,
final IndexView index = indexBuildItem.getIndex();
WebsocketClientProcessor.registerCodersForReflection(reflection, index.getAnnotations(SERVER_ENDPOINT));

int priority = 1 + FilterBuildItem.AUTHORIZATION;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is (old) WebSocket so it shouldn't matter and I don't know anything about it, but for record, I think it would be better if this was the opposite - 1-FilterBuildItem.AUTHORIZATION because this priority is multiplied by -1 and it means that this handler will run before the authorization handler. If they have some HTTP permissions, they will not run before WS handler.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Feel free to open a PR in that case

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd have to analyze why it worked this way before (why was the priority same), how the legacy WS works etc. I don't think I'll do that. I just tried to provide information, I have no problem with keeping what you have.

return new FilterBuildItem(
recorder.createHandler(webSocketDeploymentInfoBuildItem.get().getInfo(),
serverWebSocketContainerBuildItem.get().getContainer()),
100);
priority);
}

@BuildStep
Expand Down
Loading