I am trying to add a NOSQL data into my JPA-based application, following this tutorial.
The entity I want to add, was befored modeled without NOSQL in this way:
Triple.java
#Entity
#IdClass(ConceptPk.class)
#Table(name = "triple")
public class TripleDBModel {
protected List<Annotation> annotations;
public Concept conceptUriSubject;
public Concept conceptUriObject;
public Concept conceptUriPredicate;
#ManyToMany(
cascade={CascadeType.ALL },
fetch=FetchType.LAZY
)
#JoinTable(name = "triple_has_annotation",
joinColumns={#JoinColumn(name="uri_concept_subject"), #JoinColumn(name="uri_concept_object"), #JoinColumn(name="uri_concept_predicate") },
inverseJoinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="annotation_id") )
public List<Annotation> getAnnotations() {
return annotations;
}
public void setAnnotations(List<Annotation> annotations) {
this.annotations = annotations;
}
ConceptPk.java
#Embeddable
public class ConceptPk implements java.io.Serializable {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
public Concept conceptUriSubject;
public Concept conceptUriObject;
public Concept conceptUriPredicate;
#Id
#ManyToOne(cascade=CascadeType.MERGE)
#JoinColumn(name="uri_concept_subject")
public Concept getConceptUriSubject() {
return conceptUriSubject;
}
public void setConceptUriSubject(Concept conceptUriSubject) {
this.conceptUriSubject = conceptUriSubject;
}
I am omiting repetitions, but the 3 Concepts are part of the primary key, of the #Id.
Adapting this entity to NOSQL:
#Entity
#IdClass(ConceptPk.class)
#Table(name = "triple")
#NodeEntity(partial = true)
public class TripleDBModel {
//Fields referring other entities shouldn't be initialized
protected List<Annotation> annotations;
//public Concept conceptUriSubject;
//public Concept conceptUriObject;
//public Concept conceptUriPredicate;
#RelatedTo(type = "conceptUriSubject", elementClass = Concept.class)
Set<Concept> conceptUriSubject;
Now the question, which actually are two questions:
A) #RelatedTo(type = "conceptUriSubject", elementClass = Concept.class) gives me error on Eclipse, and advises me to add a cast, but this doesn't solve the error. I don't know if I must an annotation or any other additional thing to Class.java
B) As I have specified, the primery key is composed by 3 concepts, and ConceptPK.java is required. JPA modelling is ok, but I don't know how to do the same in NOSQL
Mujer,
your domain looks like it would be much easier modelled in the graph database itself. As it is RDF like triplets that are annotated here.
You are right in that Spring Data Graph right now does not support compound keys. We will look into that in the future, but I can't promise anything.
In the graph you could model your nodes being Concepts (URIs) and the type of relationship representing what you want to represent with that Concept.
(TripleDBModel) - SUBJECT -> (Concept [URI = ""])
(TripleDBModel) - PREDICATE -> (Concept [URI = ""])
(TripleDBModel) - OBJECT -> (Concept [URI = ""])
(TripleDBModel) - HAS_ANNOTATION -> (Annotation)
This could be easily modelled with Spring Data Graph (or also with the pure Neo4j API)
#NodeEntity
class Concept {
private URI uri;
}
#NodeEntity
class Triple {
// will be automatically mapped to a relationship with the name "subject"
private Concept subject;
// or provide explicit mapping
#RelatedTo(elementClass=Concept.class, type = "PREDICATE")
private Concept predicate;
private Concept object;
#RelatedTo(elementClass=Annotation.class, type = "HAS_ANNOTATION")
private Set<Annotation> annotations;
}
The eclipse error is annoying but just a wrong visualization, the AspectJ team is in the process of fixing that.
Hope that helps, if you need further advice just ask
Michael
Well, you haven't said which NoSQL engine you're going to, which is pretty important. Most NoSQL data stores don't support the concept of a composite primary key - and some of them won't allow you unique columns in the first place.
First, note that I work for a NoSQL vendor, http://gigaspaces.com/ - I'm not unbiased.
However, going from JPA to NoSQL is not hard, no matter what your engine is. For GigaSpaces, you can use JPA to talk to the data grid with very few changes, for example, although then you're still stuck with JPA.
To really think about JPA, you need to think about your data as data and not organizational stuff; you have a triplet, basically, which means your NoSQL data items consist of three data items (predicate, subject, object, like you've used.) For most NoSQL engines you'll probably want an id there, too, just for efficiency's sake.
The ID is the "primary key," and enforcing unique triplets after that is going to be on your end more than the NoSQL engine's end; this is one area where NoSQL "suffers" compared to SQL, but it's also where you find the greatest speed and storage improvements.
For some NoSQL engines, then, you'll build a document, consisting of the three data items, and you'd just query for that document before writing it into the database.
I could give you an example for many NoSQL engines (and certainly can for GigaSpaces) but I don't know which one you're targeting or why.
Have a look at Kundera.
http://mevivs.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/how-to-crud-and-jpa-association-handling-using-kundera/
Use JPA over NoSql
PlayOrm is another solution which is JPA-like but with noSQL specific features like you can do #NoSqlEmbedded on a List of Strings and it is embedded in that row leading to a table where each row is a different length than the other rows...this is a noSql common pattern which is why NoSql ORM's need a slight break from JPA.
PlayOrm also supports joins and S-SQL (scalable SQL).
later,
Dean
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 have two model classes:
public class AlertMatchesDTO implements Serializable
{
private static final long serialVersionUID = -3704734448105124277L;
#PrimaryKey
private String alertOid;
#Column("matches")
private List<HotelPriceDTO> matches;
...
}
public class HotelPriceDTO implements Serializable
{
private static final long serialVersionUID = -8751629882750913707L;
private Long hotelOid;
private double priceByNight;
private Date checkIn;
private Date checkOut;
...
}
and I want to persist instances of the first class in a Cassandra column family using Spring Data. In particular using Cassandra template like this:
...
cassandraTemplate.insert(dto, writeOptions);
...
and Spring Data have problems serializing List<HotelPriceDTO>. What I think I need is a way to tell cassandraTemplate how to convert the type. In the official documentation, there is a chapter telling that I have to use CassandraMappingConverter and MappingCassandraConverter, but they do not provide an example yet.
My question is: is there an example of how to register a converter like this (in the test code of the project, may be?) or any other example I can use while the official documentation is completed? Thanks in advance.
Hate to say this, but you should RTFM at http://docs.spring.io/spring-data/cassandra/docs/1.1.0.RELEASE/reference/html/.
Having said that, I noticed the DTO suffixes on your class names, which implies to me that you may not have a domain model, only a service layer with DTOs. If that's the case, you might consider defining the mappings yourself as RowMapper implementations and simply use CqlTemplate without the bells & whistles of Spring Data Cassandra. If you choose to fuse the architectural concepts of DTO and entity (entity being a persistent domain object), you're free to use Spring Data Cassandra along with the mapping metadata required (#Table, #PrimaryKeyColumn, etc). Your choice.
See http://goo.gl/gPBFpu for more reading on the subject of entities v. DTOs.
I am attempting to implement a Hibernate/JPA2 solution over an existing schema, which cannot be changed. Here is a minimal example of the existing schema:
CREATE TABLE REASON (
REASON_CODE CHAR(1),
REASON_DESCRIPTION CHAR(50))
CREATE TABLE HEADER (
REASON_CODE CHAR(1),
OTHERFIELD1 CHAR(40),
OTHERFIELD2 CHAR(40) )
Normally this would be the "correct" way from a DB perspective: Link REASON to HEADER by the REASON_CODE. However it's presenting me with an awkward problem in Java and I'm not sure of the best way to solve it. I've modeled these entities as follows:
#Entity
#Table(name="REASON")
public class Reason implements java.io.Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name="REASON_CODE", unique=true, nullable=false, length=1)
private Character reasonCode;
#Column(name="REASON_DESCRIPTION", nullable=false, length=25)
private String reasonDescription;
}
#Entity
#Table(name="HEADER")
public class Header implements java.io.Serializable {
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "REASON_CODE", nullable = false)
private Reason reason;
#Column(name="OTHERFIELD1")
private String otherField1;
#Column(name="OTHERFIELD2")
private String otherField2;
}
Once again, as far as I can tell, this is "correct" from a Java perspective - linking Header to Reason with a reference.
The problem is that when I need to use one of these Reason values in my code I wind up with awkward syntax like:
Reason r = reasonService.findOne('X'); // X is the REASON_CODE in the database record
// Do some processing with variable r
Or this:
header.setReason(reasonService.findOne('X'));
Ideally I could implement Reason as an enum like:
public enum Reason {
X_MARKSTHESPOT("X"),
C_MEANSSOMETHINGELSE("C"),
F_MEANSATHIRDTHING("F") ;
private String code;
private Reason(String code) {
this.code = code;
}
}
And then simply have this in my code:
header.setReason(Reason.X_MARKSTHESPOT);
But from what I understand that is not possible with JPA, which offers only EnumType.STRING (basically the name) or EnumType.ORDINAL (even worse, the index in the enum list). A possible way around this would be JPA 2.1's Converter, but I have never used it. I have also read here (in one of the answers) that a Hibernate User Type might be useful. One of our programmers has solved this in another app by writing two complete classes - an enum class for internal use and a "shadow" class which iterates through the enum and syncs the records in the database on every startup. But this seems like a kludgey way to do it. What is the best way to handle this, bearing in mind that the database schema cannot be changed?
What is appropriate way of creating objects with One-to-Many relationship using Objectify and RequestFactory? I've read documentation for these libraries, and also reviewed number of sample projects such as listwidget and gwtgae2011. All of them use #Embedded annotation which is not what I want because it stores everything within one entity. Another option according to documentation would be to use #Parent property in child classes. In my example (getters/setters removed for simplicity) I have entities Person and Organization which defined as
#Entity
public class Person extends DatastoreObject
{
private String name;
private String phoneNumber;
private String email;
#Parent private Key<Organization> organizationKey;
}
and
#Entity
public class Organization extends DatastoreObject
{
private String name;
private List<Person> contactPeople;
private String address;
}
Now if I understood documentation correctly in order to persist Organization with one Person I have to persist Organization first, then set organizationKey to ObjectifyService.factory().getKey(organization) for Person object and then persist it. I already don't like that I have to iterate through every child object manually but using RequestFactory makes everything is more convoluted due to presence of proxy classes. How would I define Organization and OrganizationProxy classes - with Key<> or without it ? Will I have to define something like this in Organization ?
public void setContactPeople(List<Person> contactPeople)
{
for (int i = 0; i < contactPeople.size(); ++i)
{
DAOBase dao = new DAOBase();
Key<Organization> key = dao.ofy().put(this);
contactPeople.get(i).setOrganizationKey(key);
}
this.contactPeople = contactPeople;
}
And how would I load Organization with its children from Datastore ? Will I have to manually fetch every Person and fill out Organization.contactPeople in #PostLoad method ?
It seems like I'll have to write A LOT of maintenance code just to do what JPA/JDO does behind the scene. I simply don't get it :(
Am I missing something or it's the only way to implement it ?
Thanks a lot for answers in advance!!!
You need to make it as #Parent only when you going to use it in transaction against all Person in this Organization. I'm sure it's not what you want.
It's enough to save just private Key<Organization> organizationKey, and filter by this field when you need to find Person for specified Organization
As about loading all referenced objects - yes, it is, you have to load it manually. It's pita, but it's not a lot of code.
Also, there is a different way to store this relationship, if your organization are small enough, and consists of few hundreds of people. At this case you can have List<Key<Person>> contactPeopleKey;, and load all this people by existing Key, manually, it much be much faster than loading by new Query
I'm not 100% sure this is only a Hibernate issue as this might be a more abstract decision but I'll give it a try.
Since the problem description is a bit lengthy I'll first state that what I'd like to do is see if I can change the implementation to something which more resembles a Best practice implementation then this.
I have 3 entities, relevant to this issue: Workstation (ws), Employee and Organization-unit(org-unit).
An Employee can belong to one org-unit.
An Org-unit can hold many employees.
A Workstation is used to display data of an Org-unit(in general), Of an Org-unit and a specific employee in it and an employee which does not belong to an org-unit.
Currently, for various reasons which were out of my control, we do not use any associations between the entities in Hibernate or via DB-Constraints but we just use Columns which logically serve as Foreign-Keys.
We currently have an additional table which has 4 columns:Id,WSId,EmployeeId,OrgUnitId.
This allows a WS to refer to an orgunit (where employeeId is null),to an employee without an org-unit (orgunitId is null) or to an employee and org-unit (where none are null).
I'd like to be able to know:
1.Given a WS, which employees is it following and which org-units and how (i.e., alone, with an employee? which?)
2.Given an employee, which WS are monitoring it.
3.Given an org-unit, which WS are monitoring it and how (i.e., alone, with an employee? which?)
This issues relates to the Presentation layer as it dictates the view will be generated BUT it is a part of the domain model as a user, will use, an interface to manipulate these monitoring mappings and so these mappings are a part of the domain model.
I'm not sure if what I have is not the least evil among options, and I would greatly appreciate comments and suggestions.
EDIT From one of the answers I think it is not clear enough that a WS can display data for many such mappings at the same time, in a mixture of the above sorts (org-unit, employee etc.)
OK, I don't know how to implement this on the database side, but here is an Entity Model that should cover the relationship you are talking about.
Edit:
This is a new version in response to your comments. Now every WorkStation has n bindings each of which can have employee or orgunit or both (use DB constraints to ensure they don't have neither).
You can also access the bindings per orgunit and per employee, which should make the above queries much easier:
#Entity
public class OrgUnit{
#OneToMany(mappedBy="orgUnit")
private Set<Binding> bindings;
}
#Entity
public class Employee{
#OneToMany(mappedBy="employee")
private Set<Binding> bindings;
}
#Entity
public class Binding{
#ManyToOne(optional = true)
private Employee employee;
#ManyToOne(optional=true)
private OrgUnit orgUnit;
#ManyToOne(optional=false)
private WorkStation owner;
}
#Entity
public class WorkStation{
#OneToMany(mappedBy="owner")
private Set<Binding> bindings;
}
Sample Client code:
public Set<WorkStation> getWorkstationsPerEmployee(final Employee employee){
final Set<WorkStation> workStations = new HashSet<WorkStation>();
for(final Binding binding : employee.getBindings()){
WorkStation workStation = binding.getOwner();
if(workStation!=null)
workStations.add(workStation);
}
return workStations;
}
Sounds like all you really need is a nullable FK on Employee to OrgUnit, and two nullable FKs on WS to both Employee and OrgUnit. To see which WS are monitoring an employee, just get all the WS with matching emp_id columns. Same with the WS monitoring an OrgUnit, possibly with the additional stipulation of emp_id being null or not (depending on if you need to handle those situations separately). No idea where "patients" fits in, you didn't give any details about that.