I am currently developing a web application and I would like to make java objects persistent at the server so that they can be retrieved at any time. Since a database is an overkill for my application, I choose the easiest way of persisting java objects: serialization to xml or to bytes. Unfortunately a big part of the code I use are java classes which I cannot modify and these classes do not implement the interface 'serializable'. What are my options regarding to serializing objects of these classes, as well as other interacting objects of my own classes?
As I said in my comments, I'd go for a SerializationService which would find the proper Serializer<T> for every object you want to save.
Something like :
public interface Serializer<T> {
Serializable toSerializable(T objectToSerialize);
//to build a factory/service around it
boolean canDeserialize(Serializable serializedObject);
T fromSerializable(Serializable serializedObject);
}
And if you want a basic, concrete example : with the quite-common Path :
public class PathSerializer implements Serializer<Path> {
#Override
public Serializable toSerializable(Path objectToSerialize) {
return objectToSerialize.toString();
}
#Override
public Path fromSerializable(Serializable serializedObject) {
if(!canDeserialize(serializedObject)){
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Cannot deserialize this");
}
return Paths.get((String)serializedObject);
}
#Override
public boolean canDeserialize(Serializable serializedObject) {
return serializedObject != null && serializedObject instanceof String;
}
}
You could also very well store POJO containing the name your original object class and the list of parameters needed in its constructor an/or a map of its fields to be able to regenerate your objects by reflection.
It's all up to you and the complexity of your application.
I think JSON would be the go-to solution here. Take Googles GSON library for example. You don't need to annotate your classes, simply write
Gson gson = new Gson();
MyObj obj = gson.fromJson(jsonString);
String json = gson.toJson(obj);
For more general information about the JSON format see the official JSON documentation.
One option would be to extend the classes that you don't have access to, in order to save their internal state, and implement Serializable on those.
More info on this SO question:
Serializing a class variable which does not implement serializable
Besides this, I don't think there is any other option except building some wrappers and serializing the classes manually to XML or JSON.
Related
I am using jackson to handle JSON (de)-serialization. I have a bunch of classes which are annotated with are essentially objects holding properties and associated getters and setters.
However, I often find that at some point I want to add additional properties which I don't want to include in the (de)-serialization process. This does work using #JsonIgnore, but it strikes me as relatively ugly since I have to add the annotation everywhere and things break down as soon as I forget.
I would like to know if there is a better way to separate the ignored and serialized properties. I have the following two ideas:
Use inheritance, add the new properties to the inherited class:
// everything here should be (de)-serialized
class Base {
public int getJSONProperty() {...}
}
// nothing specific to the class Derived should be (de)-serialized
class Derived extends Base {
// *not* to be included
public SomeClass getAdditionalProperty() {...}
}
However, I don't know how to tell jackson to deserialize the Derived
objects as Bases. Is this possible (Does jackson make guarantees
regarding (non)-polymorphic serialization of classes)?
Use MixIn annotations. This would require an additional abstract
class for each existing class. Also I am not sure whether this solves
the problem. Are getters which do not appear in the MixIn base class
ignored automatically or do I need to #JsonIgnore them manually?
I've seen that you don't like the previous solution i've provided, so I'm again here to provide another way to do what you want using Gson Library. I hope to help you this time.
This is The Base Class that you want to serialize
public class Base {
public int getJSONProperty() {
return jsonProperty;
}
private int jsonProperty = 2;
}
This is The Derived Class that you don't want to serialize
public class Derived extends Base{
public String getAdditionalProperty(){
return additionalProperty;
}
private String additionalProperty = "value-not-to-serialize";
}
Using Type type = new TypeToken<Base>(){}.getType(); you can define the class to use for serialization so you get the JSON String using:
Derived derived = new Derived();
Gson gson = new Gson();
Type type = new TypeToken<Base>(){}.getType();
String jsonString = gson.toJson(derived, type);
You know Gson? it's a good library to handle JSON.
You can use transient keyword to define variable thats not must be serialized, this works with Gson (It should work well with jackson, but i'm not sure)...
class Base {
// (de)-serialized
private int jsonProperty;
// not (de)-serialized
private transient SomeClass additionalProperty;
}
I think the best approach is to add annotation or use the transient variable.
Create the inheritance only for the purpose of serialization an object complicates the application uselessly in my point of view...
I'm using Genson to serialize + deserialize json in my android app into polymorphic objects. The JSON is coming from a variety of sources though and I can't guarantee that the #class metadata will be the first line item in the json. Walking through the Genson code and writing test cases it looks like the #class metadata has to be the first entry in the dictionary.
Has anyone had luck working around this constraint? Is it time to switch to something else, and if so, what?
public class Message {
Payload payload;
// getters & setters
}
public abstract class Payload {
//
}
public class Notification1 extends Payload {
String text;
// getters & setters
}
public class Notification2 extends Payload {
String otherText
// getters & setters
}
String correctOrder = {"#class":"Message","payload":{"#class":"Notification1","text":"Text"}}
String modifiedOrder = {"#class":"Message","payload":{"text":"Text", "#class":"Notification1"}}
Genson g = Genson.Builder()
.addAlias("Notification1", Notification1.class)
.addAlias("Notification2", Notification2.class)
.useRuntimeType(true)
.useClassMetadata(true)
.useMetadata(true)
.useFields(false)
.useIndentation(false)
.create();
g.deserialize(correctOrder, Message.class) // This works
g.deserialize(modifiedOrder, Message.class) // This barfs with the error: com.owlike.genson.JsonBindingException: Could not deserialize to type class com.ol.communication.messages.Message
Indeed the order matters. This was choosed on purpose, see the remarks in the user guide.
If we allow the #class property anywhere in the json object, then we will have to first deserialize all the json object (and its sub properties obj/arr etc) to an intermediary data structure and then to the correct type.
This would incur additional memory overhead and less speed but greater flexibility, true.
A solution would be to mark classes that are polymorphic (annotation/config in the builder), for whom Genson would search/produce the #class property in the stream. This would allow to have this overhead only for the polymorphic objects in the stream.
At the moment it is not implemented, but I opened an issue. It will come in a future release.
Outside of the technical aspects, I don't think you should have polymorphic logic (or any other fancy stuff) when you are dealing with multiple external API. I mean this kind of features is library specific, so if you don't use the same tool on both sides you can run into troubles. Usually people have a layer that will be used to communicate with the APIs and map the data to YOUR model. If you don't own the code on both ends, I think this would be a good solution on the long term.
I have such structure of object:
class A {
List<B> bees;
}
class B {
String с;
}
I'm using Gson parser which serializes such object into this string:
{"a":{"bees":[{"с":"text"}]}}
(with adding a root element "a")
API's format is a little bit different:
{"a":{"bees":[{"b":{"с":"text"}}]}}
I need to be able to parse such strings into A objects correctly.
By default B object (as a part of A) becomes not null, but empty (all fields are null) which is understandable, cause parser doesn't find any field "b" in it (when it is actually a class name).
I'm looking for a general solution for that, I have a lot of such complex objects and I don't want to implement many custom deserializers for each of them.
Gson is not obligatory, I can use another lib if it's necessary.
Thanks.
I prefer Jackson Tree Model and JDK 8 Stream to parse such json string, the core idea is to map the bees array element {"b":{"с":"text"}} to {"с":"text"} by the functional map() API.
ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
JsonNode beesNode = mapper.readTree(jsonString).get("a").get("bees");
List<JsonNode> bs = StreamSupport.stream(beesNode.spliterator(), false)
.map(bee -> bee.get("b")).collect(Collectors.toList());
If it is possible for you to change the class structure then change the class structure so as to match the API's format. For example,
class A {
List<B> bees;
}
class B {
MyTypeObjB B;
}
class MyTypeObjB {
String c;
}
EDIT As per the comments, you can also try to customize deserialize method by implementing JsonDeserializer interface on your custom class.
You can find detail information how it can be performed on,
custom-json-deserializer
gson-deserialiser-example
I'm building a simple RESTFul Service; and for achieve that I need two tasks:
Get an instance of my resource (i.e Book) from request parameters, so I can get that instance to be persisted
Build an XML document from that instance to send the representation to the clients
Right now, I'm doing both things in my POJO class:
public class Book implements Serializable {
private Long id;
public Book(Form form) {
//Initializing attributes
id = Long.parseLong(form.getFirstValue(Book.CODE_ELEMENT));
}
public Element toXml(Document document) {
// Getting an XML Representation of the Book
Element bookElement = document.createElement(BOOK_ELEMENT);
}
I've remembered an OO principle that said that behavior should be where the data is, but now my POJO depends from Request and XML API's and that doesn't feels right (also, that class has persistence anotations)
Is there any standard approach/pattern to solve that issue?
EDIT:
The libraries i'm using are Restlets and Objectify.
I agree with you when you say that the behavior should be where the data is. But at the same time, as you say I just don't feel confortable polluting a POJO interface with specific methods used for serialization means (which can grow considerably depending on the way you want to do it - JSON, XML, etc.).
1) Build an XML document from that instance to send the representation to the clients
In order to decouple the object from serialization logic, I would adopt the Strategy Pattern:
interface BookSerializerStrategy {
String serialize(Book book);
}
public class XmlBookSerializerStrategy implements BookSerializerStrategy {
public String serialize(Book book) {
// Do something to serialize your book.
}
}
public class JsonBookSerializerStrategy implements BookSerializerStrategy {
public String serialize(Book book) {
// Do something to serialize your book.
}
}
You POJO interface would become:
public class Book implements Serializable {
private Long id;
private BookSerializerStrategy serializer
public String serialize() {
return serializer.serialize(this);
}
public void setSerializer(BookSerializerStrategy serializer) {
this.serializer = serializer;
}
}
Using this approach you will be able to isolate the serialization logic in just one place and wouldn't pollute your POJO with that. Additionally, returning a String I won't need to couple you POJO with classes Document and Element.
2) Get an instance of my resource (i.e Book) from request parameters, so I can get that instance to be persisted
To find a pattern to handle the deserialization is more complex in my opinion. I really don't see a better way than to create a Factory with static methods in order to remove this logic from your POJO.
Another approach to answer your two questions would be something like JAXB uses: two different objects, an Unmarshaller in charge of deserialization and a Marshaller for serialization. Since Java 1.6, JAXB comes by default with JDK.
Finally, those are just suggestions. I've become really interested in your question actually and curious about other possible solutions.
Are you using Spring, or any other framework, in your project? If you used Spring, it would take care of serialization for you, as well as assigning request params to method params (parsing as needed).
Converting JSON to Java
The above question is with reference to what has been described on the above thread. There are so many API(s) which provide the flexibility to return responses either in XML or JSON. **I would like to know if there is a way to automatically construct the java bean corresponding to a JSON response. **
lets say you get an object like
[
{
"name":"Java 6 Greatest Hits",
"Author":"Jim Bob Jones",
"price":10.25
},
{
"name":"How to raise a goat",
"Author":"Sir Paxton",
"price":55.97
},
{
"name":"Snow - It is cold",
"Author":"Dr. White",
"price":9.99
}
]
And you want a class like
public class Book{
private String author;
private String name;
private Number price
}
with getters and setters
One option is to use a service like JSONGen, which will create that class. You need to use it first, and include the generated code in your project.
Another option could be dynamically generate the class using javassist or CGLib, but that class would be useless unless you use reflection to access its members, so even if it would be a class, it will behave like a really annoying Map. In no way will be better that simple using JSONObject
seems a simple Message Type Entity not meet you requirement ?
if you want convert a json to an existed and known java bean class,
many lib can do so, like
http://json-lib.sourceforge.net/apidocs/net/sf/json/class-use/JSONObject.html
JSONObject.toBean(JSONObject jsonObject, Class beanClass)
Creates a bean from a JSONObject, with a specific target class.
btw, if you are communicating with restful webservice, org.springframework.web.client.RestTemplate will help you get direct bean result
insteadof json.
if class does not exists, you need program with java reflect mechanism.
try use CGLIB ,http://cglib.sourceforge.net/, dynamic create some class like BeanMap. i wrote a simple sample,
but be ware, opearting class byte is hard and you may meet strange trouble with JVM . Strongly not encourage to do so.
public static BeanMap generateBean(JSONObject json) {
BeanGenerator generator = new BeanGenerator();
Iterator keys = json.keys();
while (keys.hasNext()) {
Object key = keys.next();
Object value = json.get(key);
Class keyClass = guessValueClass(value);
generator.addProperty(key.toString(), keyClass);
}
Object result = generator.create();
BeanMap bean = BeanMap.create(result);
keys = json.keys();
while (keys.hasNext()) {
Object key = keys.next();
Object value = json.get(key);
bean.put(key, value);
}
return bean;
}
/**
* TODO fix guess
*/
static Class guessValueClass(Object value) {
try {
Integer.parseInt(value.toString());
return Integer.class;
} catch (NumberFormatException e1) {
}
try {
Double.parseDouble(value.toString());
return Double.class;
} catch (NumberFormatException e1) {
}
return String.class;
}
I believe the main issue here is that the JSON response lacks type information and last time I checked :-) in Java you need to declare the type of a class property. So some heuristics will be needed to infer the type form the value in the JSON response.
For a related question here in SO have a look at: Generate Java class from JSON?
Yes check out http://flexjson.sourceforge.net
If you're wanting to generate Java classes from JSON, perhaps you could try Jackson. It provides a lot of JSON-related functionality, including the ability to generate bytecode from arbitrary JSON. See this blog post for details.
If you're using Jackson (the most popular library there), try
https://bitbucket.org/astav/jsontojava/wiki/Home
Its open source and anyone should be able to contribute.
Summary
A JsonToJava source class file generator that deduces the schema based on supplied sample json data and generates the necessary java data structures.
It encourages teams to think in Json first, before writing actual code.
Features
Can generate classes for an arbitrarily complex hierarchy (recursively)
Can read your existing Java classes and if it can deserialize into those structures, will do so
Will prompt for user input when ambiguous cases exist