I'm trying to get the clear picture of how this works:
-What is the advantage of using DAO class with DAO interface?
-How to handle Hibernate exceptions i.e
public String doSomething(){
Session session = sessionFactory.getCurrentSession();
session.beginTransaction();
Query query = session.createQuery("");
Object o = query.uniqueResult();
session.close();
return "success";
}
I'm not "forced" to try/catch, so how do I catch/intercept any exceptions that may occur?
-Is opening session everytime for new DAO method more expensive than getting the current session? Should I close the session if I use get?
Question Update:
I have #Service annotation in my service classes and for each method using dao interface I've got #Transactional above. Also I've added #Repository to all my DAO classes
Update II:
I'm considering opening bounty for this questions because I want to know more details and this time I'll provide some.
Spring context
Controller
Service Interface
Service Implementation
DAO interface
DAO implementation
So I want to utilize spring MVC as much as possible, how do I make session opening/closing handled by #Transactional?
How do I catch the exceptions(i.e. non existing record or database failed) if any.
What I'm doing wrong? Can anyone suggest some improvements?
A few things on the hibernate session side...
1.) I would take a look a integrating Spring's transaction management into your project. This way you don't have to worry about opening and closing your session's because Spring will handle this for you with intercepts using the #Transactional annotation.
2.) If spring is handling your transactions you won't have to worry about doing the finally calls to make sure everything is closed or rolled back.
3.) If you decide not to use Spring to manage the sessions you should not keep it open for any extended period of time but again, if you use Spring you don't have to worry about it.
As far as the interface on the DAO classes i offer this...
1.) It is considered a good design practice to code to interfaces (see comments left below) and here are a few good reasons why.
lets say you have a...
public interface ShoppingCartService{
public void doStuff(Object obj);
}
You could expose this service as a servlet and deal with the just the 'contract' your interface creates or even hide the fact your using Hibnerate, JDBC or anything else...
#Service
public class PetShopShoppingCartService implements ShoppingCartService{
#Transactional(propagation=Propagation.REQUIRED)
public void doStuff(Object obj){
//The Pet Shop service impl uses hibernate!;
}
}
or...
public class DrugStoreShoppingCartService implements ShoppingCartService{
public void doStuff(Object obj){
//The Drug Store service uses JDBC;
}
}
Or even...
public class NextBigThingShoppingCartService implements ShoppingCartService{
public void doStuff(Object obj){
//do stuff with next big thing;
}
}
I think you get the picture. If you developing public api's or exposing services this becomes pretty important.
Lastly, another good reason to have the interfaces is with working in a team of more than a couple developers. You can quickly stub out an interface, check-in and tell everyone else that this is how it's going to look. This allows them to see what's important and even mock their own impl if they need to (ThingServiceMockDataImpl)
Just because you're not forced to catch exceptions when using Spring's HibernateTemplate doesn't mean that they will not get thrown. They will just be RuntimeExceptions instead of checked exceptions. Also, getCurrentSession() does not open a new session each time you call it, it returns the local Thread's Session.
There are lots of advantages, including lack of code coupling, encapsulation, and transaction demarcation for using the DAO strategy instead of putting your data access code directly into your controller. See http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns/Patterns/DataAccessObject.html for more info.
Related
I am new to the concept of Aspect-Oriented Programming. I am writing this following aspect using AspectJ in my spring boot application:
#Aspect
public class MyAspect {
private final AspectUtil aspectUtil;
public MyAspect(AspectUtil aspectUtil)) {
this.aspectUtil = aspectUtil;
}
#Pointcut("#within(org.springframework.stereotype.Service)")
public void applicationServicePointcut() {
}
#AfterReturning(value = ("applicationServicePointcut()"))
public void process(JoinPoint joinPoint) {
HttpServletRequest request = aspectUtil.getRequest();
aspectUtil.getHttpVerb(request);
processUtil(request, joinPoint);
}
public void processUtil(HttpServletRequest request) {
...
}
All of the services defined in my application are annotated with #Transactional, one example is given below:
#Service
#Transactional
public class MyService {
..
}
So, here my question is if any exception I throw from my aspect as defined above, then would the associated transaction in the service layer get rolled back?
Actually, my goal is to roll back the entire transaction in case, any exception occurs at this aspect.
An example for a similar requirement 1.4.8. Advising Transactional Operations is available in the documentation.
Exerpt :
The ordering of advice is controlled through the Ordered interface.
.........
The result of the preceding configuration is a fooService bean that
has profiling and transactional aspects applied to it in that order.
If you want the profiling advice to run after the transactional advice
on the way in and before the transactional advice on the way out, you
can swap the value of the profiling aspect bean’s order property so
that it is higher than the transactional advice’s order value...
Please do go through : Advice Ordering to understand the concept better and control the order of advice.
Also go through the conceptual view of calling a method on a transactional proxy:
Basically the idea would be to throw the exception from the custom aspect that should result in the rollback from the Transaction Advisor.
The short answer is it depends. Aspects are ordered in Spring, meaning that they run with a specific order. That means that if your aspect is set to run before the transactional aspect, then no transaction will be created and there would be nothing to actually rollback.
On the other hand, if you set this to run after the transaction aspect and it indeed throws an exception, this would automatically mean that the transaction would have ran and would be committed.
I believe you need to check on ordering of aspects to find the pattern that suits your needs the best.
How should I create a controller which is thread safe?
As per the best practice controllers are singleton.
Consider the below code in which im storing user data through a autowired service Object ,which makes my code stateful.
How would i make the below code thread safe.
#RestController
class ApiController {
#Autowired
IDbService< User > iDBService;
#RequestMapping(value = "/api/adduser", method = RequestMethod.POST)
public ResponseEntity<User> createUser(#RequestBody User user){
User savedUser=iDBService.create(user);
return new ResponseEntity<User>(savedUser, HttpStatus.CREATED);
}
Here is my Service implementation.
I have shared variable in my service
public class IDbServiceImpl<T> implements IDBService<T>{
#Autowired
GenericRepository<T, Serializable> genericRepository;
#Override
public T create(T object) {
return genericRepository.save(object);
}
}
Your controller is a singleton by default and your service is singleton by default too.
Therefore in order to make them thread safe you have to make sure that the operations that take place inside the service must be thread safe, in case of changing the state of an object inside the service ie. a list.
In case of using a rdbms then you have a transaction related problem.
If you use spring and Jpa, the transaction manager will take care for your updates provided that you use #Transactional. In case of plain jdbc method then you can either use pure jdbc and do the transaction handling on your own or use spring-jdbc that comes with a transaction manager.
If you want the database rows not to be changed in case of a write in progress then you have to take into consideration row-locking related mechanisms. – gkatzioura Feb 7 at 15:23
In case of JPA using #Transactional will do the work. However depending on your application you might have to consider locking. Check this article on locking with jpa.
Controllers are singletons, therefore they should be implemented in a thread safe manner.
Design your application in a way that controllers are stateless. Add transactional support in your #Repository layer.
Example:
public class GenericRepository<T, Serializable> {
#Transactional
public void save(T object) {
// save user
}
}
You could use Spring declarative transaction management mechanism. The #Transactional annotation itself defines the scope of a single database transaction.
Your controller looks thread safe. As there is no instance variable storing the state. User object will be different for each request and will be resolved by the MVC framework.
I'm trying to get used to how JSF works with regards to accessing data (coming from a spring background)
I'm creating a simple example that maintains a list of users, I have something like
<h:dataTable value="#{userListController.userList}" var="u">
<h:column>#{u.userId}</h:column>
<h:column>#{u.userName}</h:column>
</h:dataTable>
Then the "controller" has something like
#Named(value = "userListController")
#SessionScoped
public class UserListController {
#EJB
private UserListService userListService;
private List<User> userList;
public List<User> getUserList() {
userList = userListService.getUsers();
return userList;
}
}
And the "service" (although it seems more like a DAO) has
public class UserListService {
#PersistenceContext
private EntityManager em;
public List<User> getUsers() {
Query query = em.createQuery("SELECT u from User as u");
return query.getResultList();
}
}
Is this the correct way of doing things? Is my terminology right? The "service" feels more like a DAO? And the controller feels like it's doing some of the job of the service.
Is this the correct way of doing things?
Apart from performing business logic the inefficient way in a managed bean getter method, and using a too broad managed bean scope, it looks okay. If you move the service call from the getter method to a #PostConstruct method and use either #RequestScoped or #ViewScoped instead of #SessionScoped, it will look better.
See also:
Why JSF calls getters multiple times
How to choose the right bean scope?
Is my terminology right?
It's okay. As long as you're consistent with it and the code is readable in a sensible way. Only your way of naming classes and variables is somewhat awkward (illogical and/or duplication). For instance, I personally would use users instead of userList, and use var="user" instead of var="u", and use id and name instead of userId and userName. Also, a "UserListService" sounds like it can only deal with lists of users instead of users in general. I'd rather use "UserService" so you can also use it for creating, updating and deleting users.
See also:
JSF managed bean naming conventions
The "service" feels more like a DAO?
It isn't exactly a DAO. Basically, JPA is the real DAO here. Previously, when JPA didn't exist, everyone homegrew DAO interfaces so that the service methods can keep using them even when the underlying implementation ("plain old" JDBC, or "good old" Hibernate, etc) changes. The real task of a service method is transparently managing transactions. This isn't the responsibility of the DAO.
See also:
I found JPA, or alike, don't encourage DAO pattern
DAO and JDBC relation?
When is it necessary or convenient to use Spring or EJB3 or all of them together?
And the controller feels like it's doing some of the job of the service.
I can imagine that it does that in this relatively simple setup. However, the controller is in fact part of the frontend not the backend. The service is part of the backend which should be designed in such way that it's reusable across all different frontends, such as JSF, JAX-RS, "plain" JSP+Servlet, even Swing, etc. Moreover, the frontend-specific controller (also called "backing bean" or "presenter") allows you to deal in a frontend-specific way with success and/or exceptional outcomes, such as in JSF's case displaying a faces message in case of an exception thrown from a service.
See also:
JSF Service Layer
What components are MVC in JSF MVC framework?
All in all, the correct approach would be like below:
<h:dataTable value="#{userBacking.users}" var="user">
<h:column>#{user.id}</h:column>
<h:column>#{user.name}</h:column>
</h:dataTable>
#Named
#RequestScoped // Use #ViewScoped once you bring in ajax (e.g. CRUD)
public class UserBacking {
private List<User> users;
#EJB
private UserService userService;
#PostConstruct
public void init() {
users = userService.listAll();
}
public List<User> getUsers() {
return users;
}
}
#Stateless
public class UserService {
#PersistenceContext
private EntityManager em;
public List<User> listAll() {
return em.createQuery("SELECT u FROM User u", User.class).getResultList();
}
}
You can find here a real world kickoff project here utilizing the canonical Java EE / JSF / CDI / EJB / JPA practices: Java EE kickoff app.
See also:
Creating master-detail pages for entities, how to link them and which bean scope to choose
Passing a JSF2 managed pojo bean into EJB or putting what is required into a transfer object
Filter do not initialize EntityManager
javax.persistence.TransactionRequiredException in small facelet application
It is a DAO, well actually a repository but don't worry about that difference too much, as it is accessing the database using the persistence context.
You should create a Service class, that wraps that method and is where the transactions are invoked.
Sometimes the service classes feel unnecessary, but when you have a service method that calls many DAO methods, their use is more warranted.
I normally end up just creating the service, even if it does feel unnecessary, to ensure the patterns stay the same and the DAO is never injected directly.
This adds an extra layer of abstraction making future refactoring more flexible.
Environment: Spring 3, Custom Transaction Management, JDBC Transactions
I just read the Spring docs on using the transaction template to handle transaction management. It seemed overly complex so I want to ask:
Most of my transactions are JDBC related, meaning I just declare an #Transactional on my service. But now I am making a REST service call to another site which needs to rollback if any of the following JDBC operations fail, I'll provide the rollback code in this case.
As I progress in my method, in my transaction - I want to save a reference to the REST service call (needed to roll back that action), and upon exception I just want a method myCustomRollback() called which can access the previously stored object.
Why not just provide a map in the transactionTemplate for storing stuff and define a custom rollback method on the #Transactional annotation?
This is the way I think about it, I'm not following the way Spring thinks about this. Can someone help me bridge the gap between what I want and how I accomplish it most efficiently in Spring? I only need to do this for a few special case operations.
To anyone still reading this:
I solved a similar problem with spring events - as suggested by Den Roman in option 3.
Here's the basic idea (scenario is fictional):
Whenever I perform external operations that need to be rolled back together with the transaction, I publish an event inside my #Transactional method using support from spring (org.springframework.context.ApplicationEventPublisher):
#Transactional
public String placeOrder(Order order) {
String orderId = orderServiceGateway.createOrder(order);
applicationEventPublisher.publishEvent(new OrderCreatedEvent(orderId));
workflowService.startWorkflow(orderId);
return orderId;
}
The event itself can be any object - I created a POJO with details about the remote entity to be deleted.
Then I registered a special event listener that is bound to a transaction phase - in my case to the rollback:
#TransactionalEventListener(phase = TransactionPhase.AFTER_ROLLBACK)
public void rollBackOrder(OrderCreatedEvent orderCreatedEvent) {
String orderId = orderCreatedEvent.getOrderId();
orderServiceGateway.deleteOrder(orderId);
}
Of course, it's recommended to catch & log the exception from rollback operation, not to lose the original exception from the placeOrder() method.
By default these events are synchronous, but they can be made async by additional configuration.
Here's a very good article on this mechanism, including detailed configuration and pitfalls: Transaction Synchronization and Spring Application Events (DZone)
While I don't like the solution 100% because it clutters the business logic with event publishing stuff and binds to spring, it definitely does what I expect it to do and makes it possible to pass context from the transactional method to the rollback method - which is not available through a traditional try/catch block outside of the transactional method (unless you put your context in the exception itself, which is not very nice).
I've re-read your question a few times and am not sure I understand your question completely. I assume your executing someCode and if that fails you would like to execute myCustomRollback which has some information about someCode. So I'll try to provide a Generic answer.
If you want spring to rollback some code. It will only rollback that which is rollBackAble, like jdbc transactions. Assume you have a method which performs 2 calls.
#Transactional
public void doStuff(SomeEntity entity, File file) {
persist(entity);
customFileService.createOnFileSystem(file);
throw new RunTimeException();
}
So the code above will always rollback. It will undo the persisting of your entity, but not the creation of your file, since that is not managed by Spring transactions, unless you provide custom implementation for it to be.
Second, Spring provides 2 ways of working with transactions:
Spring AOP: a proxy is created at runtime which will decorate your code with transactional stuff. If your class would be named MyClass, then Spring will create a class names MyClassProxy, which will wrap your code in transactional code.
AspectJ: at compile time your .class file will be adjusted and transactional code will be embedded inside your method.
The aspectJ approach seems harder to configure, but isn't so much and is way easier to use. Since anything which is annotated with #Transactional will be embedded (weaved) with code. For Spring AOP this is not the case. Transactional inner method calls for instance in Spring will be ignored! So aspectJ provides a more intuitive approach.
Back to what I think your question is (the code is all in 1 class):
public void doSomeCode() {
Object restCall = initialize();
try {
execute(restCall);
} catch (CustomException e) {
myCustomRollback(restCall; e);
}
}
#Transactional(rollbackFor = CustomException.class)
private void execute(Object restCall) throws CustomException {
// jdbc calls..
restCall = callRest(restCall);
throw new CustomException();
}
void myCustomRollback(Object restCall, CustomException e) {
...
}
The code above will only work with AspectJ! Since your making inner method calls which also seems to be private! AOP at runtime cannot handle this.
So what happens is everything (which is rollbackAble) in execute will be rollbacked. And in doStuff you have information about the objects which were used in execute, you now can use in myCustomRollback to rollback your REST stuff manually.
Not sure if I answered this question properly, but I hope it helps someone with a similar problem.
1 solution is to implement your own transactional manager by extending a one
2 solution is to use TransactionSynchronizationManager class
3 solution is to use #TransactionalEventListener in case you have Spring 4
Spring transaction management the default behavior for automatic rollback is for unchecked exceptions
so for a custom exception,
#Transactional(rollbackFor = CustomException.class, noRollbackFor = RuntimeException.class)
public void doSomething(...
)
the transaction be rolled back if it there is an exception that matches the specified. If an exception not matches, it is propagated to caller of the service or TransactionRolledBackException wrapper
if you use use the org.springframework.transaction.PlatformTransactionManager it is more manageable handling exceptions than template
check the documentation http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.0.x/spring-framework-reference/html/transaction.html
you can use the AfterThrowing advice (when an exception is thrown) & call your method (myCustmRollback()) there, you can use TransactionSynchronizationManager class to get thecurrent transaction & roll it back...
alternatively.. you can use the AroundAdvice to begin & commit/rollback your transaction (this way you can use the spring provided transaction manager by using the TransactionSynchronizationManager class)
Considering there is no #PersistenceContext available to inject the EntityManager, plus you need to manually manage Transactions, what is the best way to design such an application?
For the EntityManagerFactory/EntityManager, as far as I can see, you must have each DAO accepting an EntityManager in the costructor e.g.
public class DAOImpl implements DAO
{
private EntityManager em;
DAOImpl(EntityManager em){
this.em = em;
}
//all CRUD operations follow
}
The first question that rises is when do you call EntityManager#close()?
Point A: The way I see it, you are better off doing this in a Filter at the end of the request cycle, which implies that you associate the EntityManager with the current thread (using ThreadLocal?)
Second question is, how and when do you inject the EntityManager?
Considering there is a ServletContextListener where we create and close the EntityManagerFactory, we could have a static method as follows
public static EntityManager createEntityManager(){
return entityManagerFactory.createEntityManager(PERSISTENT_NAME);
}
but since we want to encapsulate creating the DAO, we could use a factory e.g.
public class DAOFactory
{
public static DAO dao(){
//return a new DAO
}
}
As per Point A we should use a ThreadLocal to create the DAO using the EntityManager for the current Thread.
For managing Transactions.
The best way I can think of (which mimics the JPA spec) is to create your own Transaction annotation and use reflection to inject the begin/commit/rollback operations.
You should then return a Proxy from the DAOFactory which handles the transactions
I wouldn't do all that. Why try to recreate the whole JPA spec yourself? You just need to be able to use JPA without a container.
Spring can help you with this. Try it.