Now, I have the next entity. This one is the m1 table of my database.
#Entity(name = "m1")
#Data
public class Information {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.AUTO)
private int id;
private String date;
private Double weight_1;
private Double weight_2;
private Double weight_3;
private Double weight_4;
private int working;
}
So, when I do some call to the APIRest it returns me the information corresponding to the m1 table. The controller that I have is the next (simple controller that returns all the information):
#Controller
#RequestMapping(path = "/information")
public class InformationController {
#Autowired
private InformationRepository repository;
#GetMapping(path="/all")
public #ResponseBody List<Information> getAllInformations() {
// This returns a JSON or XML with the users
return repository.findAll();
}
}
The question is: There is any way to change the name of the m1 on runtime. For example can I put the name of the table in the call path and in the API Rest take it?
Maybe this is impossible and I am doing it the bad way I do not know.
EDIT: I mean, can I change the table that the API Rest is taking the data by putting the table that I want in the url/path that I call. For example: in my case the default table/entity that the APIRest take the data is m1, so can I call http://localhost:8080/information/especifictable/all/ where especific table is the table that I want the recieve the data of the database and in the API Rest take that url parameter and change the default m1 with the especifictable.
I do not know if I have explained it well, I do not know how to explain it well.
Such a design would only make sense, if there are two tables in DB, which look the same. if that is the case there is something wrong with your DB design.
Basically it is not possible, to the best of my knowledge.
Related
I have entity Article I'm trying to retrieve one random record from database collection.
This is entity Article:
#Data
#Document(value = "article")
public class Article {
#Id
private String articleId;
private String title;
private String description;
private String fullArticle;
This is service to save it:
#Override
public Article save(Article article) {
return articleRepository.save(article);
}
And repository:
#Repository
public interface ArticleRepository extends MongoRepository<Article, String> {
}
So, now I'm trying to create a method that will get me one random record from my collection Article also, I want to create a controller so when I go to some endpoint and submit some get method to retrieve one record from the collection and so I can check it in postman or with Swagger. I find some answers to similar question to mine but no one solved my problem, I want to have API for something like that.
You can use $sample in an aggregation query to get a random document:
db.collection.aggregate([
{
"$sample": {
"size": 1
}
}
])
Example here
I've tested the code and it works as expected.
You can create add this method into repository:
#Aggregation(pipeline={"{$sample:{size:1}}"})
AggregationResults<Article> random();
And call from service like this:
#Override
public Article random(){
return articleRepository.random().getMappedResults().stream().findFirst().orElse(null);
// also you can use .orElseThrow() or whatever you want
}
Like/dislike system.
App has entity Post. Post has field List likes and it joins table, which has columns post_id, user_id.
When User presses button "like" app will add authenticated user in List in PostService. But I need to have the "isLiked" boolean field. This will define what the Like button will look like in frontend.
I can get value for field countLike just call method size() from field likes.
But I don't know now I can get value for field "isLiked".
Help me with it, please.
#Entity
public class Post {
//some fields...
//there I saved users, who has posed "like"
private List<User> likes;
#Transient
private int countLike;
//there I want to save status - liked/disliked;
#Transient
private boolean isLiked;
}
#Service
public class PostService {
//some fields and methods...
public void createLike(int postId, User authenticatedUser) {
Post post = postRepository.getOne(postId);
post.getLikes().add(authenticatedUser);
this.update(post);
}
}
While the approach hinted to by yourself and the comment by "Lino - Vote don't say Thanks" will work, I don't think they are a very good idea.
Working but wastful.
You can create methods like the following:
public int likeCount{}{
return getLikes().size();
}
public boolean isLiked(){
return getLikes().size() > 0;
}
The problem with that is, it will load a lot of data just for providing a single number of even just a single bit of information.
More efficient in most scenarios
Instead I recommend loading the information from the database.
Assuming you are using Hibernate as the JPA implementation you can do that with the #Formula annotation. With this the relevant code looks like this:
#Entity
public class Post {
#Formula("(select count(user_id) from Likes l where l.post_id = post_id)")
private int countLike;
public boolean isLiked(){
return getCountLike() > 0;
}
}
I'm using Spring 4.3, and I have a REST Controller that returns a User object to the UI (javascript).
The problem is that I get a User object from the Database (say with Hibernate) that contains a password. I don't want to expose the password by actually returning it. Instead, I want the controller method to put NULL in it before returning it (I could use Optional or other solutions to avoid nulls, but I'm keeping it simple in this question).
public class User {
private String username;
private String password;
//setters and getters
}
#Controller
public class MainController {
#RequestMapping(value = "/user/getOne", method = RequestMethod.GET)
public User getOneUser() {
User user = //getUser
//something to nullify the password?
return user;
}
This question concerns a User and a password for clarity, but I'm looking for a wide solution that would take care of all my data models and the values I don't want them to include in some returns.
Solutions I don't like :)
Disliked solution #1: Remove the password in a private method or a utility class' method or an Adapter class
I don't like this because it makes the code very long. Most controller methods will need their own adaptation of the data.
I prefer something more clean and short.
Disliked solution #2: Use #JsonIgnore annotation
I don't want to bind my data models with Jackson package.
Disliked solution #3: Use a smaller data model class, and blind-copy everything that the smaller can contain
This solution refers to a code such as this:
public class ReturnUser {
private String username;
}
#Controller
public class MainController {
#RequestMapping(value = "/user/getOne", method = RequestMethod.GET)
public User getOneUser() {
User user = //getUser
ReturnUser smaller = copyWhatsInCommon(user, User.class, ReturnUser.class); //sees that there's only username common to both, so copies only it
return smaller;
This also increases the quantity of code, so I don't like it.
Any ideas?
Option 1:
You can add a transformation layer between your controller and the facade (or the service which populates the entity from the database). The transformation layer classes can convert the entities into value objects. The VOs will only contain the minimal information that your view needs. If there are more entities than 1 that you need to transform into value objects, you can also use reflections to read the properties (from a config file or something) that need to be read from the entities and copied to the VOs. However, this is not quite different from the solution 3 in your question that you don't like much. While it serves from performance and security perspective, it does add additional code in form of a transformation layer.
Option 2: An alternate and straightforward option I can propose is read the required attributes from 'User' class and populate them as model attributes.
#RequestMapping(value = "/user/getOne", method = RequestMethod.GET)
public User getOneUser(ModelMap modelMap) {
User user = //getUser
modelMap.addAttribute("userName", user.getName());
modelMap.addAttribute("userEmail", user.getEmail());
...
...
}
}
From experience:
1.) You should not return your business objects from the View layer ie Controller. You see this in many tutorials, but this is poor design.
2.) You should create a response object. This response object will only contain the fields you want to return to the user.
3.) You should instantiate the fields for UserResponse in the constructor with the user object.
Using since you are creating a resposne object, you using the #JsonIgnore annotation doesn't make sense.
While this may be more code, it is a better design with a clear separation of responsibility. The controller only needs to worry about the view object and the business layer never needs to know anything about the view.
Ex
public class UserResponse {
private String firstName;
private String lastName;
public UserResponse(User user){
this.firstName = user.getFirstName();
this.lastName = user.getLastName();
}
...
//The getters
}
In the controller:
return new UserResponse(user);
Why do you want absolutely to return the User as it is represented in your entity?
The service and the controller layers should even not get a User object that contains a password field. So your 1 and 3 solution should be avoided.
In your case returning a view of the User class seems the most relevant way to achieve your need. Just use a DTO
Either you could return the User DTO from a service layer that accesses to the Data Access layer.
Or if you don't have a service layer, you could provide a method in the data access layer that returns a User DTO without the password field.
I am going to offer one more solution. Just for coverage. This is very ugly and not recommended. You can create an object mapper and filter the object:
static ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
public static String filterOutAllExcept(Object obj, String filterName, String... properties) throws YpException {
mapper.registerModule(new Hibernate4Module());
SimpleBeanPropertyFilter filter = SimpleBeanPropertyFilter.filterOutAllExcept(properties);
FilterProvider filterProvider = new SimpleFilterProvider().addFilter(filterName, filter).setFailOnUnknownId(false);
String strValue;
try {
strValue = mapper.writer(filterProvider).writeValueAsString(obj);
} catch (JsonProcessingException e) {
// handle exception
}
return strValue;
}
Then you can call it like:
String filterApplied = ObjectMapperHelper.filterOutAllExcept(user, JsonDTOFilter.SOMEFILTER, "firstName", "lastName");
This will give you a json string with the fields firstName and lastName
In old version, SDN3, I can use findById(List id), but after upgrade to SDN4, I cannot use this function again, always return empty.
This is my sample class :
#NodeEntity
public class Right{
#GraphId
Long graphId;
String id; //random generated UUID
String name;
//Properties & Constructor
}
And then I have RightRepository that contain these code :
public interface RightRepository extends GraphRepository<Right> {
List<Right> findById(List<String> id);
}
Instead of use Loop to get per ID, I need to call repository only once, and get the List (without using findAll())
Is SDN4 already not support it? Is there any other solution?
As I post in a comment and after a further investigation, I think that a custom query is the only way to accomplish your requirement at the moment. This works:
#Query("MATCH (n:Right) WHERE n.id IN {rightIds} RETURN n")
List<Right> findRightById(#Param("rightIds") List<String> rightIds);
Hope it helps
OK, so I have an interesting problem. I am using java/maven/spring-boot/cassandra... and I am trying to create a dynamic instantiation of the Mapper setup they use.
I.E.
//Users.java
import com.datastax.driver.mapping.annotations.Table;
#Table(keyspace="mykeyspace", name="users")
public class Users {
#PartitionKey
public UUID id;
//...
}
Now, in order to use this I would have to explicitly say ...
Users user = (DB).mapper(Users.class);
obviously replacing (DB) with my db class.
Which is a great model, but I am running into the problem of code repetition. My Cassandra database has 2 keyspaces, both keyspaces have the exact same tables with the exact same columns in the tables, (this is not my choice, this is an absolute must have according to my company). So when I need to access one or the other based on a form submission it becomes a mess of duplicated code, example:
//myWebController.java
import ...;
#RestController
public class MyRestController {
#RequestMapping(value="/orders", method=RequestMethod.POST)
public string getOrders(...) {
if(Objects.equals(client, "first_client_name") {
//do all the things to get first keyspace objects like....
FirstClientUsers users = (db).Mapper(FirstClientUsers.class);
//...
} else if(Objects.equals(client, "second_client_name") {
SecondClientUsers users = (db).Mapper(SecondClientUsers.class);
//....
}
return "";
}
I have been trying to use methods like...
Class cls = Class.forName(STRING_INPUT_VARIABLE_HERE);
and that works ok for base classes but when trying to use the Accessor stuff it no longer works because Accessors have to be interfaces, so when you do Class cls, it is no longer an interface.
I am trying to find any other solution on how to dynamically have this work and not have to have duplicate code for every possible client. Each client will have it's own namespace in Cassandra, with the exact same tables as all other ones.
I cannot change the database model, this is a must according to the company.
With PHP this is extremely simple since it doesn't care about typecasting as much, I can easily do...
function getData($name) {
$className = $name . 'Accessor';
$class = new $className();
}
and poof I have a dynamic class, but the problem I am running into is the Type specification where I have to explicitly say...
FirstClientUsers users = new FirstClientUsers();
//or even
FirstClientUsers users = Class.forName("FirstClientUsers");
I hope this is making sense, I can't imagine that I am the first person to have this problem, but I can't find any solutions online. So I am really hoping that someone knows how I can get this accomplished without duplicating the exact same logic for every single keyspace we have. It makes the code not maintainable and unnecessarily long.
Thank you in advance for any help you can offer.
Do not specify the keyspace in your model classes, and instead, use the so-called "session per keyspace" pattern.
Your model class would look like this (note that the keyspace is left undefined):
#Table(name = "users")
public class Users {
#PartitionKey
public UUID id;
//...
}
Your initialization code would have something like this:
Map<String, Mapper<Users>> mappers = new ConcurrentHashMap<String, Mapper<Users>>();
Cluster cluster = ...;
Session firstClientSession = cluster.connect("keyspace_first_client");
Session secondClientSession = cluster.connect("keyspace_second_client");
MappingManager firstClientManager = new MappingManager(firstClientSession);
MappingManager secondClientManager = new MappingManager(secondClientSession);
mappers.put("first_client", firstClientManager.mapper(Users.class));
mappers.put("second_client", secondClientManager.mapper(Users.class));
// etc. for all clients
You would then store the mappers object and make it available through dependency injection to other components in your application.
Finally, your REST service would look like this:
import ...
#RestController
public class MyRestController {
#javax.inject.Inject
private Map<String, Mapper<Users>> mappers;
#RequestMapping(value = "/orders", method = RequestMethod.POST)
public string getOrders(...) {
Mapper<Users> usersMapper = getUsersMapperForClient(client);
// process the request with the right client's mapper
}
private Mapper<Users> getUsersMapperForClient(String client) {
if (mappers.containsKey(client))
return mappers.get(client);
throw new RuntimeException("Unknown client: " + client);
}
}
Note how the mappers object is injected.
Small nit: I would name your class User in the singular instead of Users (in the plural).