I need to add OAuth client to a Spring 3 project. I need to use xml based configuration. And I want to know the xml equivalent of the following bean configuration I found in another Spring project. Note that there is an input parameter in the bean definition where an object of type OAuth2ClientContext is being passed (OAuth2ClientContext is an Interface) and is named clientContext. But no bean definition is written anywhere for clientContext. What does this mean? And how would you write this in xml?
#Bean
public OAuth2RestTemplate oauth2RestTemplate(OAuth2ClientContext clientContext){
return new OAuth2RestTemplate(oauth2Resource(), clientContext);
}
The configuration should be like this
<bean id="client" class="package.OAuth2ClientContext" />
<bean id="resource" class="package.Oauth2Resource" />
<bean id="restTemplate" class="package.Oauth2Resource">
<property name="nameOfPropertyResource" ref="resource" />
<property name="nameOfPropertyClient" ref="client" />
</bean>
are you sure that the bean client is not declared? Maybe it’s declared in some jar? If yes you should find it’s name and use the name in the ref
Problem:
I'm integrating with a library written by the other team. This library provides a set of classes that I'm using in my Spring-driven application. Every bean in my application is in singleton scope.
Also 99% of the classes from that library uses constructor injection.
I'm using XML and my configuration looks very similar to the following:
<bean id="lib.service1" class="lib.Service1"/>
<bean id="lib.service2" class="lib.Service2">
<constructor-arg ref="lib.service1"/>
</bean>
<bean id="lib.service3" class="lib.Service3">
<constructor-arg ref="lib.service1"/>
</bean>
<bean id="lib.service4" class="lib.Service3">
<constructor-arg ref="lib.service2"/>
<constructor-arg ref="lib.service3"/>
</bean>
<!-- other bean definitions -->
<bean id="lib.serviceN" class="lib.ServiceN">
<constructor-arg ref="lib.serviceX"/>
<constructor-arg ref="lib.serviceY"/>
<constructor-arg ref="lib.serviceZ"/>
<constructor-arg ref="lib.serviceK"/>
</bean>
<!-- other bean definitions -->
What I want:
I want to simplify my configuration to not to use bean IDs and ask spring to do constructor injection for me based on the type of arguments in the bean constructors. I can also ask library implementers to add #Inject annotation to the class constructors (the 99% of the classes have just one public constructor), but this is all that I can ask wrt refactoring of their library.
And eventually I want to have just following in my spring config (doesn't work, but illustrates the idea):
<bean class="lib.Service1"/>
<bean class="lib.Service2"/>
<bean class="lib.Service3"/>
<!-- ... -->
<bean class="lib.ServiceN"/>
Here I'm expecting Spring to figure out that I want to use constructor injection for all those beans and infer bean instances based on the constructor argument types.
Note that I cannot use component scan - they have one package (lib. in the example given above) and some classes in that package are useless for my application and too expensive to be needlessly created. Plus some classes that I'm not using are experimental and can be changed/renamed/removed without prior notice.
Add autowire="constructor", assuming these bean types only have one constructor and that the corresponding parameters match single beans.
<bean class="lib.Service1" autowire="constructor"/>
From the documentation
"constructor"
Analogous to "byType" for constructor arguments. If there
is not exactly one bean of the constructor argument type in the
bean factory, a fatal error is raised. Note that explicit
dependencies, i.e. "property" and "constructor-arg" elements, always
override autowiring. Note: This attribute will not be inherited by
child bean definitions. Hence, it needs to be specified per concrete
bean definition.
I am confused between ref and depends-on attribute in Spring.I read the spring doc but I am still confused.I wish to know the exact difference between the two and in which case which one shall be used.
From the official documentation: http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/3.2.x/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/DependsOn.html
Beans on which the current bean depends. Any beans specified are guaranteed to be created by the container before this bean. Used infrequently in cases where a bean does not explicitly depend on another through properties or constructor arguments, but rather depends on the side effects of another bean's initialisation.
Perhaps an example of a situation where depends-on is needed would help. I use Spring to load and wire my beans. Here is an example bean definition:
<bean id="myBean" class="my.package.Class">
<property name="destination" value="bean:otherBeanId?method=doSomething"/>
</bean>
<bean id="otherBeanId" class="my.package.OtherClass"/>
Notice that the property value is a string, which references otherBeanId. Because of the way this variable is resolved, Spring doesn't learn of the dependency, so it may destroy otherBeanId then myBean. This may leave myBean in a broken state for a little while.
I can use depends on to fix this problem as follows:
<bean id="myBean" class="my.package.Class" depends-on="otherBeanId">
<property name="destination" value="bean:otherBeanId?method=doSomething"/>
</bean>
There might be a situation where a bean might be a property in another bean i.e; the property bean is directly involved in the bean definition as a property in such case we refer the beans with ref attribute.
There might be a situation where in a bean instantiation is required for the other bean to be successfully created, the other bean is not a property of the bean under definition, in such case we make use of the depends-on attribute.
I would like to get inner bean by it's name. Is it possible with Spring API?
Right now I'm using such Spring 2.5 API
ConfigurableApplicationContext.getBean(String paramString)
Example of XML:
<bean id="parent" parent="t_Parent">
<property name="items">
<bean id="child" parent="t_Child">
<property name="ABC" value="test"/>
</bean>
</property>
</bean>
I would like to get inner (t_Child) bean by id "child". E.g. ConfigurableApplicationContext.getBean("child"). Spring can't find such bean (because it's inner). At the same time .getBean("parent") works fine.
Any thoughts?
You can't.
From the docs:
A element inside the or elements is used to define a so-called inner bean. An inner bean definition does not need to have any id or name defined, and it is best not to even specify any id or name value because the id or name value simply will be ignored by the container.
If you need it like that, define it as a regular bean.
You can't, but you can create you inner bean outside (so it's no longer an inner bean...) and then reference it inside the property:
<bean id="child" parent="t_Child">
<property name="ABC" value="test"/>
</bean>
<bean id="parent" parent="t_Parent">
<property name="items" ref="child"/>
</bean>
Apart from the other (mostly valid) answers and solutions, I guess the spring way would be to use the BeanWrapper interface:
final BeanWrapper bw =
new BeanWrapperImpl(applicationContext.getBean("parent"));
Object innerBean = bw.getPropertyValue("child");
But I guess that implies that there must be a getter for the property (not only a setter).
Reference:
BeanWrapper (javadoc, 2.5 version)
Bean manipulation and the BeanWrapper (reference, 2.5 version)
If you move up to Spring 3.x, you should be able to do this with the Spring Expression Language. There are examples of directly referencing a bean property from another property (like in link text). The code to do this from Java would be somewhat similar, although I can't find an exact example of this scenario.
However, I would say that if you're trying to use "getBean()", you're doing something wrong. You could just as easily use the SpEL in your context to define a bean or a bean property that references that inner bean.
I've read the Spring 3 reference on inheriting bean definitions, but I'm confused about what is possible and not possible.
For example, a bean that takes a collaborator bean, configured with the value 12
<bean name="beanService12" class="SomeSevice">
<constructor-arg index="0" ref="serviceCollaborator1"/>
</bean>
<bean name="serviceCollaborator1" class="SomeCollaborator">
<constructor-arg index="0" value="12"/>
<!-- more cargs, more beans, more flavor -->
</bean>
I'd then like to be able to create similar beans, with slightly different configured collaborators. Can I do something like
<bean name="beanService13" parent="beanService12">
<constructor-arg index="0">
<bean>
<constructor-arg index="0" value="13"/>
</bean>
</constructor>
</bean>
I'm not sure this is possible and, if it were, it feels a bit clunky. Is there a nicer way to override small parts of a large nested bean definition? It seems the child bean has to know quite a lot about the parent, e.g. constructor index.
This is a toy example - in practice the service is a large bean definition relying on many other collaborator beans, which have also other bean dependencies. For example, a chain of handlers were created with each bean referencing the next in the chain, which references the next. I want to create an almost identical chain with some small changes to handlers in the middle, how do I it?
I'd prefer not to change the structure - the service beans use collaborators to perform their function, but I can add properties and use property injection if that helps.
This is a repeated pattern, would creating a custom schema help?
Thanks for any advice!
EDIT: The nub of my question is, if I have a really large bean definition, with a complex hiearchy of beans being created (bean having properites that are bean etc.), and I want to create a bean that is almost the same with a few changes, how to I do it? Please mention if your solution has to use properites, or if constructor injection can be used.
Nested vs. top-level beans are not the issue (in fact, I think all the beans are top level in practice.)
EDIT2: Thank you for your answers so far. A FactoryBean might be the answer, since that will reduce the complexity of the spring context, and allow me to specify just the differences as parameters to the factory. But, pushing a chunk of context back into code doesn't feel right. I've heard that spring can be used with scripts, e.g. groovy - does that provide an alternative? Could the factory be created in groovy?
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to achieve. I don't think you can achieve exactly what you want without creating your own custom schema (which is non-trivial for nested structures), but the following example is probably pretty close without doing that.
First, define an abstract bean to use as a template for your outer bean (my example uses a Car as the outer bean and an Engine as the inner bean), giving it default values that all other beans can inherit:
<bean id="defaultCar" class="Car" abstract="true">
<property name="make" value="Honda"/>
<property name="model" value="Civic"/>
<property name="color" value="Green"/>
<property name="numberOfWheels" value="4"/>
<property name="engine" ref="defaultEngine"/>
</bean>
Since all Honda Civics have the same engine (in my world, where I know nothing about cars), I give it a default nested engine bean. Unfortunately, a bean cannot reference an abstract bean, so the default engine cannot be abstract. I've defined a concrete bean for the engine, but mark it as lazy-init so it will not actually be instantiated unless another bean uses it:
<bean id="defaultEngine" class="Engine" lazy-init="true">
<property name="numberOfCylinders" value="4"/>
<property name="volume" value="400"/>
<property name="weight" value="475"/>
</bean>
Now I can define my specific car, taking all the default values by referencing the bean where they are defined via parent:
<bean id="myCar" parent="defaultCar"/>
My wife has a car just like mine, except its a different model (again, I know nothing about cars - let's assume the engines are the same even though in real life they probably are not). Instead of redefining a bunch of beans/properties, I just extend the default car definition again, but override one of its properties:
<bean id="myWifesCar" parent="defaultCar">
<property name="model" value="Odyssey"/>
</bean>
My sister has the same car as my wife (really), but it has a different color. I can extend a concrete bean and override one or more properties on it:
<bean id="mySistersCar" parent="myWifesCar">
<property name="color" value="Silver"/>
</bean>
If I liked racing minivans, I might consider getting one with a bigger engine. Here I extend a minivan bean, overriding its default engine with a new engine. This new engine extends the default engine, overriding a few properties:
<bean id="supedUpMiniVan" parent="myWifesCar">
<property name="engine">
<bean parent="defaultEngine">
<property name="volume" value="600"/>
<property name="weight" value="750"/>
</bean>
</property>
</bean>
You can also do this more concisely by using nested properties:
<bean id="supedUpMiniVan" parent="myWifesCar">
<property name="engine.volume" value="600"/>
<property name="engine.weight" value="750"/>
</bean>
This will use the "defaultEngine". However, if you were to create two cars this way, each with different property values, the behavior will not be correct. This is because the two cars would be sharing the same engine instance, with the second car overriding the property settings set on the first car. This can be remedied by marking the defaultEngine as a "prototype", which instantiates a new one each time it is referenced:
<bean id="defaultEngine" class="Engine" scope="prototype">
<property name="numberOfCylinders" value="4"/>
<property name="volume" value="400"/>
<property name="weight" value="475"/>
</bean>
I think this example gives the basic idea. If your data structure is complex, you might define multiple abstract beans, or create several different abstract hierarchies - especially if your bean hierarchy is deeper than two beans.
Side note: my example uses properties, which I believe are much clearer to understand, both in Spring xml and in Java code. However, the exact same technique works for constructors, factory methods, etc.
Your example will not work as specified, because the nested bean definition has no class or parent specified. You'd need to add more information, like this:
<bean name="beanService13" parent="beanService12">
<constructor-arg index="0">
<bean parent="beanBaseNested">
<constructor-arg index="0" value="13"/>
</bean>
</constructor>
Although I'm not sure if it's valid to refer to nested beans by name like that.
Nested bean definitions should be treated with caution; they can quickly escalate into unreadability. Consider defining the inner beans as top-level beans instead, which would make the outer bean definitions easier to read.
As for the child beans needing to know the constructor index of the parent bean, that's a more basic problem with Java constructor injection, in that Java constructor arguments cannot be referred to by name, only index. Setter injection is almost always more readable, at the cost of losing the finality of constructor injection.
A custom schema is always an option, as you mentioned, although it's a bit of a pain to set up. If you find yourself using this pattern a lot, it might be worth the effort.
Have you thought of using a factory instead?
You can config beans to have a factory and you could encode the varying parameters in the factory creation...
To expand on the factory pattern from Patrick: you can use a prototype bean to get pre-wired dependencies:
<bean id="protoBean" scope="prototype">
<property name="dependency1" ref="some bean" />
<property name="dependency2" ref="some other bean" />
...
</bean>
Now, this works best if you use setter injection (rather than constructor arguments), i'm not sure you can even do it you require constructor args.
public class PrototypeConsumingBean implements ApplicationContextAware {
public void dynmicallyCreateService(String serviceParam) {
// creates a new instance because scope="prototype"
MyService newServiceInstance = (MyService)springContext.getBean("protoBean");
newServiceInstance.setParam(serviceParam);
newServiceInstance.mySetup();
myServices.add(newServiceInstance);
}
public void setApplicationContext(ApplicationContext ctx) {
m_springContext = ctx;
}
}