We have a POJO that contains a collection and have it annotated thus:
#XmlElement(name = "<MyId")
#XmlElementWrapper(name = "MyIds")
private final Set<Long> myIds;
We are using JacksonJaxbJsonProvider in CXF to do the marshalling in our REST service.
The problem we are seeing is that if someone requests application/xml the response is correct, in that the user gets:
<MyIds>
<MyId>123</MyId>
<MyId>456</MyId>
...
</MyIds>
But when application/json is requested, the user gets (note the singular field name):
{
"MyId" : [123, 456, ...]
}
What I want to know is if there's a way to make that plural in the JSON response, and if so, how.
This feels like it may be bug in Jackson but there may be a perfectly good reason this is happening. Also, I realize that if everyone used the same POJO, we wouldn't have to care about what the marshalled text looked like, but in this case, one of the consumers cannot use our POJO.
If you're using version 2.1 or above of Jackson there's a feature which can be enabled to get the behaviour you want
ObjectMapper m = new ObjectMapper()
m.configure(MapperFeature.USE_WRAPPER_NAME_AS_PROPERTY_NAME, true);
Related
We are trying to create a Java client for an API created with Spring Data.
Some endpoints return hal+json responses containing _embedded and _links attributes.
Our main problem at the moment is trying to wrap our heads around the following structure:
{
"_embedded": {
"plans": [
{
...
}
]
},
...
}
When you hit the plans endpoint you get a paginated response the content of which is within the _embedded object. So the logic is that you call plans and you get back a response containing an _embedded object that contains a plans attribute that holds an array of plan objects.
The content of the _embedded object can vary as well, and trying a solution using generics, like the example following, ended up returning us a List of LinkedHashMap Objects instead of the expected type.
class PaginatedResponse<T> {
#JsonProperty("_embedded")
Embedded<T> embedded;
....
}
class Embedded<T> {
#JsonAlias({"plans", "projects"})
List<T> content; // This instead of type T ends up deserialising as a List of LinkedHashMap objects
....
}
I am not sure if the above issue is relevant to this Jackson bug report dating from 2015.
The only solution we have so far is to either create a paginated response for each type of content, with explicitly defined types, or to include a List<type_here> for each type of object we expect to receive and make sure that we only read from the populated list and not the null ones.
So our main question to this quite spread out issue is, how one is supposed to navigate such an API without the use of Spring?
We do not consider using Spring in any form as an acceptable solution. At the same time, and I may be quite wrong here, but it looks like in the java world Spring is the only framework actively supporting/promoting HAL/HATEOAS?
I'm sorry if there are wrongly expressed concepts, assumptions and terminology in this question but we are trying to wrap our heads around the philosophy of such an implementation and how to deal with it from a Java point of view.
You can try consuming HATEOS API using super type tokens. A kind of generic way to handle all kind of hateos response.
For example
Below generic class to handle response
public class Resource<T> {
protected Resource() {
this.content = null;
}
public Resource(T content, Link... links) {
this(content, Arrays.asList(links));
}
}
Below code to read the response for various objects
ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
Resource<ObjectA> objectA = objectMapper.readValue(response, new TypeReference<Resource<ObjectA>>() {});
Resource<ObjectB> objectB = objectMapper.readValue(response, new TypeReference<Resource<ObjectB>>() {});
You can refer below
http://www.java-allandsundry.com/2012/12/json-deserialization-with-jackson-and.html
http://www.java-allandsundry.com/2014/01/consuming-spring-hateoas-rest-service.html
I have made a service that returns an array of UserSettings objects:
#GET
#Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
#Path("/")
public Response getBulkSettings(#QueryParam("fields") List<String> fields, #QueryParam("ids") List<String> ids) {
List<UserSettings> responseArr = mailerService.fetchSettings(ids,fields);
return Response.ok(responseArr).build();
}
When I make a GET request on the URL
http://localhost:8181/settings?ids=123&fields=customData,user_id
I get the following:
[
{
"id": 0,
"user_id": 123,
"customData": "testCustomDataFor123",
"deactivationDate": null
}
]
While what I want is :
[
{
"user_id": 123,
"customData": "testCustomDataFor123"
}
]
Put #JsonIgnore at the fields you don't want or its getter.
Using the annotation #JsonIgnore is a solution if you can decide on the attributes to be filtered at compile-time. In your example you want to filter at run-time, which can be achieved using techniques from your JSON library. For example, when using Genson you could do something like this:
new GensonBuilder().exclude("password").create();
However, by doing so you loose the advantage of not having to care about how your response is serialised into JSON. Therefore, I would like to suggest that you think if it is really necessary that clients can dynamically decide on the attributes to be returned. Another solution might be to use media-types other than application/json that would allow the client to request different views of the resource. Jersey distributes incoming requests using the media-type given in the Accept header to the methods in the service class. In each method you can then work with different sub-classes of your UserSettings class that exclude different attributes using the annotation #JsonIgnore.
You could do it how the other responses suggests.
Another option with JAX-RS would be to leverage another Genson feature that enables you to filter what properties should be included or excluded.
To do so register a custom Genson instance with this special Filter.
UrlQueryParamFilter filter = new UrlQueryParamFilter();
Genson genson = new GensonBuilder().useRuntimePropertyFilter(filter).create();
new ResourceConfig()
.register(new GensonJaxRSFeature().use(genson))
.register(filter);
And then in the query define the properties you want to include or exclude like that: http://localhost/foo/bar?filter=age&filter=name.
Some more explanation can be found here.
I'm trying to filter the response of an API Endpoint using the Jackson library.
I can use #JsonFilter("[filterNameHere]") but this ends up with the class expecting the filter to be applied every time.
Is there a way I can filter the response only on one particular instance?
Pizza pizza = pizzaService.getPizzaById(pizzaId);
ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
FilterProvider filters = new SimpleFilterProvider().addFilter("baseFilter", SimpleBeanPropertyFilter.serializeAllExcept("base"));
String json = mapper.writer(filters).writeValueAsString(pizza);
return Response.status(200).entity(json).build();
I've tried looking around but haven't been able to find anything right.
Unfortunately association between filter id and class is static, so any class either has it or does not; that is, you can not sometimes have a filter, other times not.
It should be however possible to either:
indicate a "default" filter to use (with SimpleFilterProvider.setDefaultFilter()), to be used in case there is no explicitly registered filter matching the id. This filter could basically be "include all" filter, which would have no effect on processing.
indicate that in case no match is found for filter id, no filtering is done: SimpleFilterProvider.setFailOnUnknownId(false) (on provider instance)
So I think what you really want to do is second option, something like:
SimpleFilterProvider filters = new SimpleFilterProvider();
filters.setFailOnUnknownId(false);
String json = mapper.writer(filters).writeValueAsString(pizza);
I'm using Jackson's readValue() method on an object mapper to read from a JSON file and convert it into my java object.
eg.
mapperObject.readValue( node, MyTargetClass.class )
Are there any annotations that I can set on MyTargetClass to enforce required attributes? For example, if I have a JSON object with properties ABC,DEF and GHI, and my Json is the following
{
"ABC" : "somevalue"
"DEF" : "someothervalue"
}
I want it to fail somehow, and only succeed on the readValue if it contained ABC, DEF and GHI.
You can mark a property as required with the #JsonProperty(required = true) annotation, and it will throw a JsonMappingException during deserialization if the property is missing or null.
Edit: I received a downvote for this without comment. I'd love to know why, since it does exactly the right thing.
Jackson does not include validation functionality, and this is by design (i.e. that is considered out-of-scope). But what is usually used is Bean Validation API implementation.
The nice thing about this is decoupling between data format handling, and validation logic.
This is what frameworks like DropWizard use; and it's the direction JAX-RS (like Jersey) are taking things for JAX-RS 2.0.
If you want to make sure a json field is provided, you have to use the #JsonProperty(value = "fieldName", required = true) annotation as a parameter to the constructor. But this is not enough, also the Constructor should have #JsonCreator annotation.
For example, if you have a field named 'endPoint' and you want o make sure it is provided in the JSON file, then the following code will throw an exception if it is not provided.
#JsonCreator
public QuerySettings(#JsonProperty(value = "endPoint", required = true) String endPoint) {
this.endPoint = endPoint;
}
I found this link helpful to understand the Jackson annotations. It also well explains why required=true is not enough and counter-intuitive to its name.
If you are neither satisfied with using #JsonProperty(required = true) as it works only with #JsonCreator nor with the use of bean validation then one more way of tackling it would be to catch this in your setter methods for the relevant variables.
You can simply check if the variable is null before setting it and throw an IllegalArgumentException or NullPointerException (as preferred by few people)
Note: It depends on how your POJO is defined too, so please make sure that it is going the setter method route for this solution to work.
Suppose I have a pojo:
import org.codehaus.jackson.map.*;
public class MyPojo {
int id;
public int getId()
{ return this.id; }
public void setId(int id)
{ this.id = id; }
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
MyPojo mp = new MyPojo();
mp.setId(4);
ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
mapper.configure(SerializationConfig.Feature.WRAP_ROOT_VALUE, true);
System.out.println(mapper.getSerializationConfig().isEnabled(SerializationConfig.Feature.WRAP_ROOT_VALUE));
System.out.println(mapper.writeValueAsString(mp));
}
}
When I serialize using the Jackson ObjectMapper, I just get
true
{"id":4}
but I want
true
{"MyPojo":{"id":4}}
I've searched all over, Jacksons documentation is really unorganized and mostly out of date.
By adding the jackson annotation #JsonTypeInfo in class level you can have the expected output. i just added no-changes in your class.
package com.test.jackson;
import org.codehaus.jackson.map.ObjectMapper;
import org.codehaus.jackson.map.SerializationConfig;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonTypeInfo;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonTypeInfo.As;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonTypeInfo.Id;
#JsonTypeInfo(include=As.WRAPPER_OBJECT, use=Id.NAME)
public class MyPojo {
// Remain same as you have
}
output:
{
"MyPojo": {
"id": 4
}
}
I'm not using jackson, but searching I found this configuration that seems to be what you want: WRAP_ROOT_VALUE
Feature that can be enabled to make root value (usually JSON Object but can be any type) wrapped within a single property JSON object, where key as the "root name", as determined by annotation introspector (esp. for JAXB that uses #XmlRootElement.name) or fallback (non-qualified class name). Feature is mostly intended for JAXB compatibility.
Default setting is false, meaning root
value is not wrapped.
So that you can configure mapper:
objectMapper.configure(SerializationConfig.Feature.WRAP_ROOT_VALUE, true);
I hope it helps you...
Below is a way to achieve this
Map<String, MyPojo> singletonMap = Collections.singletonMap("mypojo", mp);
System.out.println(mapper.writeValueAsString(singletonMap));
Output
{ "mypojo" : { "id" : 4}}
Here the advantage is that we can give our on name for the root key of json object. By the above code, mypojo will be the root key. This approach will be most useful when we use java script template like Mustache.js for iteration of json objects
To achieve this you need to use the JsonTypeInfo annotation on your class and in particular WRAPPER_OBJECT
#JsonTypeName("foo")
#JsonTypeInfo(include = JsonTypeInfo.As.WRAPPER_OBJECT ,use = JsonTypeInfo.Id.NAME)
public class Bar(){
)
There is also a nice annotation for this:
#JsonRootName(value = "my_pojo")
public class MyPojo{
...
}
will generate:
{
"my_pojo" : {...}
}
How about simplest possible solution; just use a wrapper class like:
class Wrapper {
public MyPojo MyPojo;
}
and wrapping/unwrapping in your code?
Beyond this, it would help to know WHY you would like additional json object entry like this? I know this is done by libs that emulate json via xml api (because of impedance between xml and json, due to conversion from xml to json), but for pure json solutions it is usually not needed.
Is it to allow you do figure out what actual type is?
If so, perhaps you could consider enabled polymorphic type information, to let Jackson handle it automatically? (see 1.5 release notes, entry for PTH, for details).
there is another way i used and that worked for me.
I am working with a third party jar, so i have no control for annotations.
So i had to write through bit of hack.
Override: org.codehaus.jackson.map.ser.BeanSerializerFactory.findBeanProperties(SerializationConfig, BasicBeanDescription)
Add your property as below
List<BeanPropertyWriter> props = super.findBeanProperties(config, beanDesc);
BeanPropertyWriter bpw = null;
try {
Class cc = beanDesc.getType().getRawClass();
Method m = cc.getMethod("getClass", null);
bpw = new BeanPropertyWriter("$className", null, null, m, null,true, null);
} catch (SecurityException e) {
// TODO
} catch (NoSuchMethodException e) {
// TODO
}
props.add(bpw);
return props;
This way i get more control and can do other kind of filters too.
#JsonTypeInfo(include=As.WRAPPER_OBJECT, use=Id.NAME)
This annotation works perfectly, as suggested by Arun Prakash. I was trying to get json in this form:
{"Rowset":{"ROW":{"receiptno":"881604199388936","status":"SUCCESS"}}}
but getting like this:
{"ROW":{"receiptno":"881604199388936","status":"SUCCESS"}}
Now that annotation resolved my problem.
I would be interested in hearing the OP's solution for this. I'm having similar issues where my RESTful web service is serializing objects as either XML or JSON for clients. The Javascript clients need to know the wrapping type so that can parse it. Coupling the type to a URI pattern is not an option.
Thanks.
Edit: I noticed that Spring MappingJacksonJsonMarshaller adds the wrapping class when marshalling, so I stepped through the code in debug and noticed that Spring passes in a HashMap with a single key-value pair such that the key is the wrapping name and the value is the object. So, I extended JacksonJaxbJsonProvider, override the writeTo() method and added the following:
HashMap<String, Object> map = new HashMap<String, Object>();
map.put(value.getClass().getSimpleName(), value);
super.writeTo(map, type, genericType, annotations, mediaType, httpHeaders,entityStream);
It's a bit of a hack, but it works nicely.
use withRootName.
objectMapper.writer().withRootName(MyPojo.class.getName());
I have found through experience that it is a good idea for all JSON to include both the backend type (as a string) and the component type used to render it in the front end (if using something like angular or Vue).
The justification for doing this is so that you can process various types with a single set of code.
In vue, for example, having the name of the UI component in the data allows you, among other things, to have a screen rendering a list of children of different types using only a single tag in the parent template.
<component :is="child.componentType"/>.
For backend systems and web services - I prefer to use a single web service processor class that provides logging, auditing and exception handling for all web services by looking up the appropriate processor class based on the incoming payload. That makes the implementation of all my web services look exactly the same (about 3 lines of code), and I get detailed event logging through the lifecycle of the call without writing any per service code to do so.
Having the type wrapping the JSON makes it self documenting. If all you see are the properties, you have no idea what you are looking at until you find the corresponding end point.
If you want to write data driven software, being able to identify what you are processing is a basic requirement.