I am developing a simple forum web application using SpringMVC, JPA2.
I have created JPA entities like User, Forum, Post etc which reflects the DB table structure.
But while displaying the data on UI I need DTOs as I can't always hold the data to be displayed on UI using Entities.
For ex: Change Password screen. Here I need to hold Old Pwd, New Password and Confirm New Pwd. But User entity won't have Old/New/Confirm Pwd fields, it just has Password. So I need to create DTOs which are just data carriers between Web and service layers.
My question is while creating DTO objects, should I put all the properties in DTO itself or wrap the Entity in DTO and add additional properties needed?
Ex: For Edit User Screen,
public class UserDTO
{
private User user; // User is a JPA entity
// setters & getters
}
With this I can pass the underlying User entity to my service layer. But while binding UI properties to DTO I need to associate PropertyEditors.
(or)
public class UserDTO
{
private String userId;
private String userName;
private String password;
// setters & getters
}
With this approach, I need to convert & copy the DTO properties into JPA entities and pass to Service layer.
Which approach is better? Or is there any other approach without DTOs altogether?
Your first approach still carries the Entity object itself to the presentation layer. If you have additional parameters that are not coming from the database, and your persistence context is still available, then this approach is sufficient.
The second approach requires duplication of code, which is not ideal.
If the persistence context is not available, I would suggest detaching the Entity from the persistence context using EntityManager.detach(), rather than creating a parallel hierarchy of beans.
On the other hand, if data is coming in from the presentation layer, you will need to load the Entity from the database (using find() or something similar) and update it, or merge() it into the persistence context.
Related
So I'm trying for the first time in a not so complex project to implement Domain Driven Design by separating all my code into application, domain, infrastructure and interfaces packages.
I also went with the whole separation of the JPA Entities to Domain models that will hold my business logic as rich models and used the Builder pattern to instantiate. This approach created me a headache and can't figure out if Im doing it all wrong when using JPA + ORM and Spring Data with DDD.
Process explanation
The application is a Rest API consumer (without any user interaction) that process daily through Scheduler tasks a fairly big amount of data resources and stores or updates into MySQL. Im using RestTemplate to fetch and convert the JSON responses into Domain objects and from there Im applying any business logic within the Domain itself e.g. validation, events, etc
From what I have read the aggregate root object should have an identity in their whole lifecycle and should be unique. I have used the id of the rest API object because is already something that I use to identify and track in my business domain. I have also created a property for the Technical id so when I convert Entities to Domain objects it can hold a reference for the update process.
When I need to persist the Domain to the data source (MySQL) for the first time Im converting them into Entity objects and I persist them using the save() method. So far so good.
Now when I need to update those records in the data source I first fetch them as a List of Employees from data source, convert Entity objects to Domain objects and then I fetch the list of Employees from the rest API as Domain models. Up until now I have two lists of the same Domain object types as List<Employee>. I'm iterating them using Streams and checking if an objects are not equal() between them if yes a collection of List items is created as a third list with Employee objects that need to be updated. Here I've already passed the technical Id to the domain objects in the third list of Employees so Hibernate can identify and use to update the records that are already exists.
Up to here are all fairly simple stuff until I use the saveAll() method to update the records.
Questions
I alway see Hibernate using INSERT instead of updating the list of
records. So If Im correct Hibernate session is not recognising the
objects that Im throwing into it because I have detached them when I
used the convert to domain object?
Does anyone have a better idea how can I implement this differently or fix
this problem?
Or should I stop using this approach as two different objects and continue use
them as rich Entity models?
Simple classes to explain it with code
EmployeeDO.java
#Entity
#Table(name = "employees")
public class EmployeeDO implements Serializable {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Long id;
private String name;
public EmployeeDO() {}
...omitted getter/setters
}
Employee.java
public class Employee {
private Long persistId;
private Long employeeId;
private String name;
private Employee() {}
...omitted getters and Builder
}
EmployeeConverter.java
public class EmployeeConverter {
public static EmployeeDO serialize(Employee employee) {
EmployeeDO target = new EmployeeDO();
if (employee.getPersistId() != null) {
target.setId(employee.getPersistId());
}
target.setName(employee.getName());
return target;
}
public static Employee deserialize(EmployeeDO employee) {
return new Country.Builder(employee.getEmployeeId)
.withPersistId(employee.getId()) //<-- Technical ID setter
.withName(employee.getName())
.build();
}
}
EmployeeRepository.java
#Component
public class EmployeeReporistoryImpl implements EmployeeRepository {
#Autowired
EmployeeJpaRepository db;
#Override
public List<Employee> findAll() {
return db.findAll().stream()
.map(employee -> EmployeeConverter.deserialize(employee))
.collect(Collectors.toList());
}
#Override
public void saveAll(List<Employee> employees) {
db.saveAll(employees.stream()
.map(employee -> EmployeeConverter.serialize(employee))
.collect(Collectors.toList()));
}
}
EmployeeJpaRepository.java
#Repository
public interface EmployeeJpaRepository extends JpaRepository<EmployeeDO, Long> {
}
I use the same approach on my project: two different models for the domain and the persistence.
First, I would suggest you to don't use the converter approach but use the Memento pattern. Your domain entity exports a memento object and it could be restored from the same object. Yes, the domain has 2 functions that aren't related to the domain (they exist just to supply a non-functional requirement), but, on the other side, you avoid to expose functions, getters and constructors that the domain business logic never use.
For the part about the persistence, I don't use JPA exactly for this reason: you have to write a lot of code to reload, update and persist the entities correctly. I write directly SQL code: I can write and test it fast, and once it works I'm sure that it does what I want. With the Memento object I can have directly what I will use in the insert/update query, and I avoid myself a lot of headaches about the JPA of handling complex tables structures.
Anyway, if you want to use JPA, the only solution is to:
load the persistence entities and transform them into domain entities
update the domain entities according to the changes that you have to do in your domain
save the domain entities, that means:
reload the persistence entities
change, or create if there're new ones, them with the changes that you get from the updated domain entities
save the persistence entities
I've tried a mixed solution, where the domain entities are extended by the persistence ones (a bit complex to do). A lot of care should be took to avoid that domain model should adapts to the restrictions of JPA that come from the persistence model.
Here there's an interesting reading about the splitting of the two models.
Finally, my suggestion is to think how complex the domain is and use the simplest solution for the problem:
is it big and with a lot of complex behaviours? Is expected that it will grow up in a big one? Use two models, domain and persistence, and manage the persistence directly with SQL It avoids a lot of caos in the read/update/save phase.
is it simple? Then, first, should I use the DDD approach? If really yes, I would let the JPA annotations to split inside the domain. Yes, it's not pure DDD, but we live in the real world and the time to do something simple in the pure way should not be some orders of magnitude bigger that the the time I need to to it with some compromises. And, on the other side, I can write all this stuff in an XML in the infrastructure layer, avoiding to clutter the domain with it. As it's done in the spring DDD sample here.
When you want to update an existing object, you first have to load it through entityManager.find() and apply the changes on that object or use entityManager.merge since you are working with detached entities.
Anyway, modelling rich domain models based on JPA is the perfect use case for Blaze-Persistence Entity Views.
Blaze-Persistence is a query builder on top of JPA which supports many of the advanced DBMS features on top of the JPA model. I created Entity Views on top of it to allow easy mapping between JPA models and custom interface defined models, something like Spring Data Projections on steroids. The idea is that you define your target structure the way you like and map attributes(getters) via JPQL expressions to the entity model. Since the attribute name is used as default mapping, you mostly don't need explicit mappings as 80% of the use cases is to have DTOs that are a subset of the entity model.
The interesting point here is that entity views can also be updatable and support automatic translation back to the entity/DB model.
A mapping for your model could look as simple as the following
#EntityView(EmployeeDO.class)
#UpdatableEntityView
interface Employee {
#IdMapping("persistId")
Long getId();
Long getEmployeeId();
String getName();
void setName(String name);
}
Querying is a matter of applying the entity view to a query, the simplest being just a query by id.
Employee dto = entityViewManager.find(entityManager, Employee.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 and it can also be saved back. Here a sample repository
#Repository
interface EmployeeRepository {
Employee findOne(Long id);
void save(Employee e);
}
It will only fetch the mappings that you tell it to fetch and also only update the state that you make updatable through setters.
With the Jackson integration you can deserialize your payload onto a loaded entity view or you can avoid loading alltogether and use the Spring MVC integration to capture just the state that was transferred and flush that. This could look like the following:
#RequestMapping(path = "/employee/{id}", method = RequestMethod.PUT, consumes = MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON_VALUE)
public ResponseEntity<String> updateEmp(#EntityViewId("id") #RequestBody Employee emp) {
employeeRepository.save(emp);
return ResponseEntity.ok(emp.getId().toString());
}
Here you can see an example project: https://github.com/Blazebit/blaze-persistence/tree/master/examples/spring-data-webmvc
I'm writing a Spring Boot (with JPA) REST application where one of the entities that compose my model is owned by a different/external service, which can be fetch using a REST api.
#Entity
public class ManagedEntity {
#Id
private UUID id;
private ExternalEntity external; // I can be fetch from a REST api
}
I'd like to know how should I map my entity in order to have my JPA implementation to load it from the REST api, if possible.
Or, what would be the best way to model my entity/application in order to have a rich model?
It is not possible to do at data-access-layer. You can load the data in the business logic. Change your #Entity class adding
#Transient
private ExternalEntity external;
Fetch the data from the DB first and then try to make a service call to populate ExternalEntity
You could mark entire ExternalEntity with #Transient and initialize it in a service logic.
But the best way in returning data is to return view objects instead of JPA domain objects
Since you marked the question with a Spring tag and since you seem to be looking for the easy-done-for-you suggestion, why not use Spring-Data-REST? From the front page ...
Spring Data REST
Spring Data REST is part of the umbrella Spring Data project and makes it easy to build hypermedia-driven REST web services on top of Spring Data repositories.
I have a very simple task,
I have a "User" Entity.
This user has tons of fields, for example :
firstName
age
country
.....
My goal is to expose a simple controller for update:
#RequestMapping(value = "/mywebapp/updateUser")
public void updateUser(data)
I would like clients to call my controller with updates that might include one or more fields to be updated.
What are the best practices to implement such method?
One naive solution will be to send from the client the whole entity, and in the server just override all fields, but that seems very inefficient.
another naive and bad solution might be the following:
#Transactional
#RequestMapping(value = "/mywebapp/updateUser")
public void updateUser(int userId, String[] fieldNames, String[] values) {
User user = this.userDao.findById(userId);
for (int i=0 ; i < fieldsNames.length ; i++) {
String fieldName = fieldsName[i];
switch(fieldName) {
case fieldName.equals("age") {
user.setAge(values[i]);
}
case fieldName.equals("firstName") {
user.setFirstName(values[i]);
}
....
}
}
}
Obviously these solutions aren't serious, there must be a more robust\generic way of doing that (reflection maybe).
Any ideas?
I once did this genetically using Jackson. It has a very convenient ObjectMapper.readerForUpdating(Object) method that can read values from a JsonNode/Tree onto an existing object.
The controller/service
#PATCH
#Transactional
public DomainObject partialUpdate (Long id, JsonNode data) {
DomainObject o = repository.get(id);
return objectMapper.readerForUpdating(o).readValue(data);
}
That was it. We used Jersey to expose the services as REST Web services, hence the #PATCH annotation.
As to whether this is a controller or a service: it handles raw transfer data (the JsonNode), but to work efficiently it needs to be transactional (Changes made by the reader are flushed to the database when the transaction commits. Reading the object in the same transaction allows hibernate to dynamically update only the changed fields).
If your User entity doesn't contains any security fields like login or password, you can simply use it as model attribute. In this case all fields will be updated automatically from the form inputs, those fields that are not supose to be updated, like id should be hidden fields on the form.
If you don't want to expose all your entity propeties to the presentation layer you can use pojo aka command to mapp all needed fields from user entity
BWT It is really bad practice to make your controller methods transactional. You should separate your application layers. You need to have service. This is the layer where #Transactional annotation belongs to. You do all the logic there before crud operations.
My bean looks like that:
#Entity
public class Fattura {
#Id
Long id;
#NotEmpty
String numero;
#Min(value=0)
Double importo;
Key<User> utente;
// gets & sets....
}
The "utente" property is the key of another bean I created: a "Fattura" can have only one "User", one "User" can have many "Fattura"s
My Spring MVC controller will manage a request for a list of Fattura and display them in a simple jsp:
#RequestMapping( value = "/fatture" , method = RequestMethod.GET )
public ModelAndView leFatture() {
ModelAndView mav = new ModelAndView("fatture");
mav.addObject("fatture",fatturaService.listFatture());
return mav;
}
the code of the jsp is really simple: only a foreach cycle in a table
My question is:
how can I display the "utente"?
The only thing I have is its key, but I'd like to do something like ${fattura.utente.firstName} in my JSP, how can I do it?
Unfortunately you would have to manually fetch "utente" in your DAO class. There is no automatic fetching in Objectify like in Twig. In my POJOs I have following fields
#Transient private Organization sender; // Pickup location (for client RPC)
transient private Key<Organization> senderKey; // Pickup location (for Datastore)
I load entity from Datastore and then load manually Organization using senderKey.
In new Objectify4 you'll be able to do what you want like this:
class Beastie {
#Parent
#Load
ParentThing parent;
#Id Long id;
#Load({"bigGroup", "smallGroup"})
SomeThing some;
#Load("bigGroup")
List<OtherThing> others;
#Load
Ref<OtherThing> refToOtherThing;
Ref<OtherThing> anotherRef; // this one is never fetched automatically
}
Here is evolving design document of new version.
Update at Nov 17, 2011: This is big news. Twig author, John Patterson, joined Objectify project today.
I know it sounds annoying that you have to manually fetch the two objects, but it's actually very useful to know that you're doubling your work and time to do this - each "get" call take a while and the second won't start until the first is complete. It a typical NoSQL environment, you shouldn't often need to have two separate entities - is there a reason that you do?
There are only two reasons I can easily think of:
The class references another object of the same type - this is the example in the Objectify documentation, where a person has a reference to their spouse, who is also a person.
The class that you're embedding the other into ("Fattura" in your case) has masses of data in it that you don't want fetched at the same time as you want to fetch the "User" - and you need the user on it's own more often than you need the "Fattura" and the "User". It would need to be quite a lot of data to be worth the extra datastore call when you DO want the "Fattura".
You don't necessarily have to use temporary field for just getting a object.
This works:
public User getUtente() {
Objectify ofy = ObjectifyService.begin();
return ofy.get(utenteKey);
}
This will of course do a datastore get() each time the getter is called. You can improve this by using #Cached on your User entity, so they turn into memcache calls after the first call. Memcache is good, but we can do a little better using the session cache:
public User getUtente() {
Objectify ofy = myOfyProvider.get();
return ofy.get(utenteKey);
}
The key thing here is that you need to provide (through myOfyProvider) an instance of Objectify that is bound to the current request/thread, and that has the session cache enabled. (ie, for any given request, myOfyProvider.get() should return the same instance of Objectify)
In this setup, the exact same instance of User will be returned from the session cache each time the getter is called, and no requests to the datastore/memcache will be made after from the initial load of this Entity.
The Spring MVC binding mechanism is powerful, but I'm now confronted with a trivial issue that I wonder how to resolve:
User JPA entity, that is used for the binding and validation as well (i.e. throughout all layers)
"Edit profile" page, that is not supposed to change the password or some other entity properties
Two ways that I can think of:
Using the same object
use #InitBinder to configure a list of disallowed properties
obtain the target user (by id)
then use a reflection utility (BeanUtils) to copy the submitted object to the target object, but ignore null values - i.e. fields that are not submitted
Introduce a new object that has the needed subset of fields, and use BeanUtils.copyProperties(..) to merge it to the entity.
Alternatives?
I've found that as soon as your web model starts to diverge from your business layer in function, it's best to use a view layer object (a model object) to collect, or display the data
the entity:
public class com.myapp.domain.UserEntity {
}
the model object:
public class com.myapp.somesite.web.SomeSiteUserModel {
public static SomeSiteUserModel from(UserEntity userEntity) {
... initialize model ...
}
public UserEntity getModelObject() {
... get entity back ...
}
}
now all view based operations can hand off processing to the internal model object if that makes sense, otherwise it can customize them itself. Of course the problem with this is you have to re-write all the getters and setters you want for the entity (an issue that I've had to deal with, that is annoying) unfortunately that is a bit of a Java language issue
I just checked up with two of the last Spring projects I have worked on and in both places the following approach is taken:
In the JSP page for the form the change password field has a name that does not match the name of the password field in the User bean, so that it doesn't get mapped to the bean. Then in the onSubmit method there is a separate check whether a new password has been submitted, and if it has been, the change is reflected explicitly.
Поздрави,
Vassil
You can read the object from the database first and bind then the request. You can find an example at FuWeSta-Sample.
It uses a helper-bean which must be initialized by Spring.