I'm trying to use JPA (with Hibernate) to save 2 entities. Spring data is providing the interface but I don't think it matters here.
I have a main entity called 'Model'. This model has many 'Parameter' entities linked. I'm writing a method to save a model and its parameters.
This is the method:
private void cascadeSave(Model model) {
modelRepository.save(model);
for (ParameterValue value : model.getParameterValues()) {
parameterValueRepository.save(value);
}
}
This is the problem:
When I load a Model that already existed before, add some new parameters to it and then call this method to save both of them something strange happens:
Before the first save (modelRepository.save) this is what the model's data looks like when debugging:
The model has 2 parameters, with filled in values (name and model are filled).
Now, after saving the model the first save in my method, this happens. Note that the object reference is a different one so Hibernate must have done something magical and recreated the values instead of leaving them alone:
For some reason hibernate cleared all the attributes of the parameters in the set.
Now when the saving of the new parameters happens in the following code it fails because of not null constraints etc.
My question: Why does hibernate clear all of the fields?
Here are the relevant mappings:
ParameterValue
#Entity
#Table(name = "tbl_parameter_value")
#Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.SINGLE_TABLE)
#DiscriminatorColumn(name = "PARAMETER_TYPE")
public abstract class ParameterValue extends AbstractBaseObject {
#Column(nullable = false)
#NotBlank
private String name;
private String stringValue;
private Double doubleValue;
private Integer intValue;
private Boolean booleanValue;
#Enumerated(EnumType.STRING)
private ModelType modelParameterType;
#Column(precision = 7, scale = 6)
private BigDecimal bigDecimalValue;
#Lob
private byte[] blobValue;
ParameterValue() {
}
ParameterValue(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
ModelParameterValue
#Entity
#DiscriminatorValue(value = "MODEL")
public class ModelParameterValue extends ParameterValue {
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "model_id", foreignKey = #ForeignKey(name = "FK_VALUE_MODEL"))
private Model model;
ModelParameterValue() {
super();
}
ModelParameterValue(String name) {
super(name);
}
Model
#Entity
#Table(name = "tbl_model")
public class Model extends AbstractBaseObject implements Auditable {
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy = "model")
private Set<ModelParameterValue> parameterValues = new HashSet<>();
EDIT
I was able to reproduce this with a minimal example.
If you replace everything spring data does this is what happened under the hood (em is a JPA EntityManager):
public Model simpleTest() {
Model model = new Model("My Test Model");
em.persist(model);
model.addParameter(new Parameter("Param 1"));
em.merge(model);
for (Parameter child : model.getParameters()) {
em.persist(child);
}
return model;
}
When the merge is executed, all of the attributes of the parameters are set to null. They are actually just replaced with completely new parameters.
I guess you are using Spring Data Jpa as your modelRepository. This indicates following consequences.
Spring Repository Save
S save(S entity)
Saves a given entity. Use the returned
instance for further operations as the save operation might have
changed the entity instance completely.
So it is normal behaviour which you had encountered.
Code should be changed to :
model = modelRepository.save(model);
for (ParameterValue value : model.getParameterValues()) {
parameterValueRepository.save(value);
}
EDIT:
I think that your saving function is broken in sense, that you do it backwards. Either you can use CascadeType on your relation or you have to save children first.
Cascade
Cascade works like that "If you save Parent, save Children, if you update Parent, update Children ..."
So we can put cascade on your relation like that :
#Entity
#Table(name = "tbl_model")
public class Model extends AbstractBaseObject implements Auditable {
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy = "model", cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
private Set<ModelParameterValue> parameterValues = new HashSet<>();
and then only save like this
private void cascadeSave(Model model) {
modelRepository.save(model);
//ParamValues will be saved/updated automaticlly if your model has changed
}
Bottom-Up save
Second option is just to save params first and then model with them.
private void cascadeSave(Model model) {
model.setParameterValues(
model.getParameterValues().stream()
.map(param -> parameterValueRepository.save(param))
.collect(Collectors.toSet())
);
modelRepository.save(model);
}
I haven't checked second code in my compiler but the idea is to first save children (ParamValues), put it into Model and then save Model : )
Related
Lets say I have an entity like this,
#Entity(name = "Post")
#Table(name = "post")
public class Post {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long id;
private String title;
#OneToMany(
mappedBy = "post",
cascade = CascadeType.ALL,
orphanRemoval = true,
FetchType.LAZY
)
#JsonManagedReference
private List<PostComment> comments = new ArrayList<>();
#OneToOne(
mappedBy = "post",
cascade = CascadeType.ALL,
orphanRemoval = true,
fetch = FetchType.LAZY
)
private PostDetails details;
}
I want clone this entity, modified a few fields and then persist the new cloned entity in the database. What's the best approach to achieve this?
You can use a copy using constructor or the builder pattern, or to set the properties using simple setters. Then, persist the new entity instance using the EntityManager's persist() method. To avoid issues with duplicated id values, you must not copy the id field and instead let the JPA generate a new id when the entity is persisted.
Code example
public class Post {
// constructor, getters and setters are omitted
public Post(Post post) {
//Don’t copy id!
this.title = post.getTitle();
this.comments = new ArrayList<>(post.getComments());
this.details = new PostDetails(post.getDetails());
}
}
public class PostDetails {
// constructor, getters and setters are omitted
public PostDetails(PostDetails details) {
// Don’t copy id!
this.description = details.getDescription();
// copy other fields as needed
}
}
// Usage
public class PostsRepository{
#Autowired
EntityManager em;
public void saveCopy(Post originalPost){
Post clonedPost = new Post(originalPost);
em.persist(clonedPost);
}
}
Also I would highly recommend you to write tests in order to check that you are doing everything fine. Moreover you will more space for experiments.
In our spring boot application, I am trying to save an aggregate, that consists of a root entity (ParentEntity) and a Set of child entities (ChildEntity).
The intention is, that all operations are done through the aggreate. So there is no need for a repository for ChildEntity, as the ParentEntity is supposed to manage all save or update operations.
This is how the Entities look like:
#Entity
#Table(name = "tab_parent", schema = "test")
public class ParentEntity implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "parent_id")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Integer parentId;
#Column(name = "description")
private String description;
#Column(name = "created_datetime", updatable = false, nullable = false)
#ColumnTransformer(write = "COALESCE(?,CURRENT_TIMESTAMP)")
private OffsetDateTime created;
#Column(name = "last_modified_datetime", nullable = false)
#ColumnTransformer(write = "COALESCE(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,?)")
private OffsetDateTime modified;
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL, orphanRemoval = true, mappedBy = "ParentEntity")
private Set<ChildEntity> children;
// constructor and other getters and setters
public void setChildren(final Set<ChildEntity> children) {
this.children = new HashSet<>(children.size());
for (final ChildEntity child : children) {
this.addChild(child);
}
}
public ParentEntity addChild(final ChildEntity child) {
this.children.add(child);
child.setParent(this);
return this;
}
public ParentEntity removeChild(final ChildEntity child) {
this.children.add(child);
child.setParent(null);
return this;
}
}
#Entity
#DynamicUpdate
#Table(name = "tab_child", schema = "test")
public class ChildEntity implements Serializable {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "child_id")
private Integer childId;
#Column(name = "language_id")
private String languageId;
#Column(name = "text")
private String text;
#Column(name = "created_datetime", updatable = false, nullable = false)
#ColumnTransformer(write = "COALESCE(?,CURRENT_TIMESTAMP)")
public OffsetDateTime created;
#Column(name = "last_modified_datetime", nullable = false)
#ColumnTransformer(write = "COALESCE(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP,?)")
public OffsetDateTime modified;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "parent_id", updatable = false)
private ParentEntity parent;
// constructor and other getters and setters
public ParentEntity getParent() {
return this.parent;
}
public void setParent(final ParentEntity parent) {
this.parent = parent;
}
}
This is the store method to save or update the entities:
public Integer merge(final ParentDomainObject parentDomainObject) {
final ParentEntity parentEntity =
this.mapper.toParentEntity(parentDomainObject);
final ParentEntity result = this.entityManager.merge(parentEntity);
this.entityManager.flush();
return result.getParentId();
}
And this is the store method to retrieve the aggregate by id:
public Optional<ParentDomainObject> findById(final Integer id) {
return this.repo.findById(id).map(this.mapper::toParentDomainObject);
}
As you can see our architecture strictly separates the store from the service layer. So the service only knows about domain objects and does not depend on Hibernate Entites at all.
When updating either the child or the parent, firstly the parent is loaded. In the service layer, the domain object is updated (fields are set, or a child is added/removed).
Then the merge method (see code snippet) of the store is called with the updated domain object.
This works, but not completely as we want to. Currently every update leads to the parent and EVERY chhild entity being saved, even if all field remained the same. We added the #DynamicUpdate annotaton. Now we saw, that the "modified" field is the problem.
We use a #ColumnTransformer to have the database set the date. Now even if you call the services update method without changing anything, Hibernate generates a update query for EVERY object, which updates only the modified field.
The worst thing about that is, as every object is saved, every modified date changed as well to the current date. But we need information about exactly which object really changed and when.
Is there any way to tell hibernate, that this column should not be taken into account when deciding what to update. However of course, if a field changed, the update operation should indeed update the modified field.
UPDATE:
My second approach after #Christian Beikov mentioned the use of #org.hibernate.annotations.Generated( GenerationTime.ALWAYS )
is the following:
Instead of #Generated (which uses #ValueGenerationType( generatedBy = GeneratedValueGeneration.class )),
I created my own annotations, which use custom AnnotationValueGeneration implementations:
#ValueGenerationType(generatedBy = CreatedTimestampGeneration.class)
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
public #interface InDbCreatedTimestamp {
}
public class CreatedTimestampGeneration
implements AnnotationValueGeneration<InDbCreatedTimestamp> {
#Override
public void initialize(final InDbCreatedTimestamp annotation, final Class<?> propertyType) {
}
#Override
public GenerationTiming getGenerationTiming() {
return GenerationTiming.INSERT;
}
#Override
public ValueGenerator<?> getValueGenerator() {
return null;
}
#Override
public boolean referenceColumnInSql() {
return true;
}
#Override
public String getDatabaseGeneratedReferencedColumnValue() {
return "current_timestamp";
}
}
#ValueGenerationType(generatedBy = ModifiedTimestampGeneration.class)
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
public #interface InDbModifiedTimestamp {
}
public class ModifiedTimestampGeneration
implements AnnotationValueGeneration<InDbModifiedTimestamp> {
#Override
public void initialize(final InDbModifiedTimestamp annotation, final Class<?> propertyType) {
}
#Override
public GenerationTiming getGenerationTiming() {
return GenerationTiming.ALWAYS;
}
#Override
public ValueGenerator<?> getValueGenerator() {
return null;
}
#Override
public boolean referenceColumnInSql() {
return true;
}
#Override
public String getDatabaseGeneratedReferencedColumnValue() {
return "current_timestamp";
}
}
I use these annotations in my entities instead of the #ColumnTransformer annotations now.
This works flawlessly when I insert a new ChildEntity via addChild(), as now not all timestamps of all entities of the aggregate are updated anymore. Only the timestamps of the new child are set now.
In other words, the InDbCreatedTimestamp works as it should.
Sadly, the InDbModifiedTimestamp does not. Because of GenerationTiming.ALWAYS, I expected the timestamp to be generated on db level, everytime an INSERT OR UPDATE is issued. If I change a field of a ChildEntity and then save the aggregate, an update statement is generated only for this one database row, as expected. However, the last_modified_datetime column is not updated, which is surprising.
It seems that this is unfortunately still an open bug. This issue describes my problem precisely: Link
Can someone provide a solution how to get this db function executed on update as well (without using db triggers)
You could try to use #org.hibernate.annotations.Generated( GenerationTime.ALWAYS ) on these fields and use a database trigger or default expression to create the value. This way, Hibernate will never write the field, but read it after insert/update.
Overall this has a few downsides though (need the trigger, need a select after insert/update), so I think this is a perfect use case for Blaze-Persistence Entity Views.
I created the library to allow easy mapping between JPA models and custom interface or abstract class defined models, something like Spring Data Projections on steroids. The idea is that you define your target structure(domain model) the way you like and map attributes(getters) via JPQL expressions to the entity model.
A DTO/domain model for your use case could look like the following with Blaze-Persistence Entity-Views:
#EntityView(ParentEntity.class)
#UpdatableEntityView
public interface ParentDomainObject {
#IdMapping
Integer getParentId();
OffsetDateTime getModified();
void setModified(OffsetDateTime modified);
String getDescription();
void setDescription(String description);
Set<ChildDomainObject> getChildren();
#PreUpdate
default preUpdate() {
setModified(OffsetDateTime.now());
}
#EntityView(ChildEntity.class)
#UpdatableEntityView
interface ChildDomainObject {
#IdMapping
Integer getChildId();
String getName();
}
}
Querying is a matter of applying the entity view to a query, the simplest being just a query by id.
ParentDomainObject a = entityViewManager.find(entityManager, ParentDomainObject.class, id);
The Spring Data integration allows you to use it almost like Spring Data Projections: https://persistence.blazebit.com/documentation/entity-view/manual/en_US/index.html#spring-data-features
Page<ParentDomainObject> findAll(Pageable pageable);
The best part is, it will only fetch the state that is actually necessary! It also supports writing/mapping back to the persistence model in an efficient manner. Since it does dirty tracking for you, it will only flush changes if the object is actually dirty.
public Integer merge(final ParentDomainObject parentDomainObject) {
this.entityViewManager.save(this.entityManager, parentDomainObject);
this.entityManager.flush();
return parentDomainObject.getParentId();
}
I have two tables in database orders and offers. Earlier there was #OneToOne mapping between two i.e. for a single order, there was a single offer. Corresponding domains are:
#Entity
#Table(name = "orders")
#DiscriminatorFormula("0")
#DiscriminatorValue("0")
class Order {
#OneToOne(mappedBy = "order", fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade = {CascadeType.ALL})
private Offer offer;
public Offer getOffer() {
return this.offer;
}
public void setOffer(Offer offer) {
this.offer = offer;
}
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "offers")
class Offer {
}
Now, i want OneToMany mapping between two i.e. for a single order, there can be multiple offers now. But for that, i want to build new version of Domain so as not to effect existing functionality. As it is OneToMany mapping so i will have to use Set or List. So, effectively, i want did:
#Entity
#DiscriminatorValue("00")
class OrderV2 extends Order {
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "order", fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade = {CascadeType.ALL})
private Set<Offer> offer;
public Set<Offer> getOffer() {
return this.offer;
}
public void setOffer(Set<Offer> offer) {
this.offer = offer;
}
}
How can i achieve this as currently it is giving me error in getter method as overridden method cannot have different return type.
Actually your problem is that you are using a field with the same name offer as the field in the super class while both have different types, so it will be confusing because you will have the child getter for Set<Offer> overriding the parent getter for Offer, that's why you get the Exception:
error in getter method as overridden method cannot have different return type
What you will have to do here is to use a different name for the field in your child class, for example offers, so the Model will be correct and Hibernate will correctly map the objects:
#Entity
#DiscriminatorValue("00")
class OrderV2 extends Order {
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "order1", fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade = {CascadeType.ALL})
private Set<Offer> offers;
public Set<Offer> getOffers() {
return this.offers;
}
public void setOffers(Set<Offer> offers) {
this.offers = offers;
}
}
Note:
You need to have two objects of type Order in your Offer class, one for the mapping of offer and the second for the offers mapping, notice the mappedBy = "order1" in the mapping.
I have the following simple scenario:
Cars table: Id, Name, Model
Cars Schedule table:Id, CarId, ScheduleTime, ScheduleDate
I am using Spring MVC with Hibernate, with the structure of:
Domain
repo
repoImpl
service
serviceImpl
what I need to do is displaying the car name in the list of the Cars Schedule without having to add a field called CarName in the CarsSchedule table.
What is the best practice for doing this?
In Car entity you should have
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "car")
private List<CarsSchedule> schedules;
I assumed that the relation is #OneToMany, but you can just switch it to #OneToOne private CarsSchedule schedule;, if that's the case.
And in CarsSchedule entity, this
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "CarId")
private Car car;
With this setup, once you have the carsSchedule instance in your controller (and model), you can display the name of the car on the page with #{carsSchedule.car.name}.
I think you should have a one-to-many relationship in the table Cars Schedule:
//in class CarsSchedule
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "CAR_ID", nullable = false)
public Stock getCar() {
return this.car;
}
Then in the controller, you retrieve the list of CarSchedule (that has also the Car into it) and put the list into the model:
#RequestMapping(value = "car-list", method = RequestMethod.GET)
public String getList(HttpSession session, Map<String, Object> model) {
//get the list from the service
List<CarsSchedule> list = service.getCarScheduleList();
//put into the model
model.put("form", new PersonUserRoleForm());
return "mymodel";
}
then you have a mymodel.jsp maybe, where you can retieve the variable mymodel
You can follow this simple tutorial:
http://www.mkyong.com/hibernate/hibernate-one-to-many-relationship-example-annotation/
Ciao
If you're setting the annotations on the property accessor method, you can simply add
#Transient
public String getName() {
return car.getName();
}
It will be invisible for your database but visible for all other layers. In JSP you would access it as ${carsSchedule.name}, and it would be an immediate child in your JSON or XML if that is the representation you use
Even if your annotating properties themselves you can still do
#Transient
private String name;
public String getName() {
return car.getName();
}
I recon that your main idea is to avoid persisting another field. Note just that the transient annotation is the javax.persistence.Transient and it has no implication to the serialization just tells the persistence provider to ignore the field upon persisting
I have two Entities OrgType and OrgField:
#Entity(name = "T_ORG_FIELD")
public class OrgField extends Model {
#MinSize(value = 2)
#Column(nullable = false)
public String name;
#ManyToOne
public OrgType orgType;
...
}
#Entity(name = "T_ORG_TYPE")
public class OrgType extends Model {
#Column(nullable = false, unique = true)
public String name;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "orgType")
public List<OrgField> orgFields = new ArrayList<OrgField>();
...
}
Now, I'm writing unit test for them:
public class OrganizationTest extends UnitTest {
#Test
public void saveOrRemoveOrg() {
OrgType orgType = new OrgType("org type", "description");
orgType.save();
OrgField field = new OrgField();
field.name = "field1";
field.orgType = orgType;
field.save();
Model.em().flush();
System.out.println(OrgField.count("name = ?", "field1")); // Output : 1
int size = orgType.orgFields.size();
assertEquals(1, size); // Error , expect 1 but get 0.
...
I created a new OrgField and update its reference of orgType, and expected to have orgType.orgFields automatically be filled, but it didn't.
Any help ?
Try to fill fetch attribute as below:
#ManyToOne(fetch=FetchType.EAGER)
#OneToMany(mappedBy="orgType", fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
FecthType.EAGER will fetch it as you desire. You can define different values for each class, if you like. Instead, you can you FetchType.LAZY, it is a good practive to explicity set this attribute instead of leaving the default value to be used.
Moreover, you can use the attribute cascade with CascadeType.ALL to persist, etc. automatically as well, or check CascadeType enum to see other values. It is also a good practice to explicity define the value of cascade attribute.