Let's say I have a simple REST app with Controller, Service and Data layers. In my Controller layer I do something like this:
#PostMapping("/items")
void save(ItemDTO dto){
Item item = map(dto, Item.class);
service.validate(item);
service.save(item);
}
But then I get errors because my Service layer looks like this:
public void validate(Item item) {
if(item.getCategory().getCode().equals(5)){
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Items with category 5 are not currently permitted");
}
}
I get a NullPointerException at .equals(5), because the Item entity was deserialized from a DTO that only contains category_id, and nothing else (all is null except for the id).
The solutions we have found and have experimented with, are:
Make a special deserializer that takes the ids and automatically fetches the required entities. This, of course, resulted in massive performance problems, similar to those you would get if you marked all your relationships with FetchType.EAGER.
Make the Controller layer fetch all the entities the Service layer will need. The problem is, the Controller needs to know how the underlying service works exactly, and what it will need.
Have the Service layer verify if the object needs fetching before running any validations. The problem is, we couldn't find a reliable way of determining whether an object needs fetching or not. We end up with ugly code like this everywhere:
(sample)
if(item.getCategory().getCode() == null)
item.setCategory(categoryRepo.findById(item.getCategory().getId()));
What other ways would you do it to keep Services easy to work with? It's really counterintuitive for us having to check every time we want to use a related entity.
Please note this question is not about finding any way to solve this problem. It's more about finding better ways to solve it.
From my understanding, it would be very difficult for modelMapper to map an id that is in the DTO to the actual entity.
The problem is that modelMapper or some service would have to do a lookup and inject the entity.
If the category is a finite set, could use an ENUM and use static ENUM mapping?
Could switch the logic to read
if(listOfCategoriesToAvoid.contains(item.getCategory())){ throw new IllegalArgumentException("Items with category 5 are not currently permitted"); }
and you could populate the listOfCategoriesToAvoid small query, maybe even store it in a properties file/table where it could be a CSV?
When you call the service.save(item), wouldn't it still fail to populate the category because that wouldn't be populated? Maybe you can send the category as a CategoryDTO inside the itemDTO that populated the Category entity on the model.map() call.
Not sure if any of these would work for you.
From what I can gather the map(dto, Item.class) method does something like this:
Long categoryId = itemDto.getCategoryId();
Category cat = new Category();
cat.setId(categoryId);
outItem.setCategory(cat);
The simplest solution would be to have it do this inside:
Long categoryId = itemDto.getCategoryId();
Category cat = categoryRepo.getById(categoryId);
outItem.setCategory(cat);
Another option is since you are hardcoding the category code 5 until its finished, you could hard-code the category IDs that have it instead, if those are not something that you expect to be changed by users.
Why aren't you just using the code as primary key for Category? This way you don't have to fetch anything for this kind of check. The underlying problem though is that the object mapper is just not able to cope with the managed nature of JPA objects i.e. it doesn't know that it should actually retrieve objects by PK through e.g. EntityManager#getReference. If it were doing that, then you wouldn't have a problem as the proxy returned by that method would be lazily initialized on the first call to getCode.
I suggest you look at something like Blaze-Persistence Entity Views which has first class support for something like that.
I created the library to allow easy mapping between JPA models and custom interface or abstract class defined models, something like Spring Data Projections on steroids. The idea is that you define your target structure(domain model) the way you like and map attributes(getters) via JPQL expressions to the entity model.
A DTO model for your use case could look like the following with Blaze-Persistence Entity-Views:
#EntityView(Item.class)
// You can omit the strategy to default to QUERY when using the code as PK of Category
#UpdatableEntityView(strategy = FlushStrategy.ENTITY)
public interface ItemDTO {
#IdMapping
Long getId();
String getName();
void setName(String name);
CategoryDTO getCategory();
void setCategory(CategoryDTO category);
#EntityView(Category.class)
interface CategoryDTO {
#IdMapping
Long getId();
}
}
Querying is a matter of applying the entity view to a query, the simplest being just a query by id.
ItemDTO a = entityViewManager.find(entityManager, ItemDTO.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
Page<ItemDTO> findAll(Pageable pageable);
The best part is, it will only fetch the state that is actually necessary!
And in your case of saving data, you can use the Spring WebMvc integration
that would look something like the following:
#PostMapping("/items")
void save(ItemDTO dto){
service.save(dto);
}
class ItemService {
#Autowired
ItemRepository repository;
#Transactional
public void save(ItemDTO dto) {
repository.save(dto);
Item item = repository.getOne(dto);
validate(item);
}
// other code...
}
Related
I've heard when you want to return some object from a service method, you have to define a DTO object (or POJO object generated with JSON Schema) instead of using an Entity.
To make it clear, here is the example:
We have an entity and a jpa repository for it:
#Data
#Entity
#Table(name = "tables")
public class Table {
#Id
private Long id;
private String brand;
}
This is a bad practice:
#Service
public class MyService {
#Autowired
private TableRepository tableRepository;
#Transactional
public Table create() {
Table table = new Table();
// Some logic for creating and saving table
return table;
}
}
This is a good practice:
#Service
public class MyService {
#Autowired
private TableRepository tableRepository;
#Transactional
public TableDTO create() {
Table table = new Table();
// Some logic for creating and saving table
// Logic for converting Table object to TableDTO object
return tableDTO;
}
}
Why is this so?
Thank you!
Probably you mean a DTO (Data Transfer Object), not DAO (Data Access Object). Let me clarify this:
Data Transfer Object:
A Pojo that represents a piece of information. Usually it has aggregated data in it.
Data Access Object:
An object that performs access to some kind of persistence storage for retrieving information, someone considers it a synonim of Repository, someone not.
Entity:
An object that represents data that has been retrieved from the database.
Why is returning an Entity from the Service considered a bad practice?
The reason is that the Entity is something that is very close to the database. It contains primary key, someone could guess your database structure from it and the set of the data in case of query can be verbose. Hence, it is preferable to have some kind of logic, usually a mapper, that hides primary key and aggregates data to be less verbose and to not expose the db structure. Also, while the Entity is built on the table structure, the DTO can be customized in base of caller needs. Usually it contains exactly the data that is needed for some action and nothing more than this. Suppose you have thirdy party software that calls your backend services: you should not expose the db structure (Entities) to this service. It is better to define a contract, with the minimal information needed for this thirdy party service to operate, and expose only this part of the information, hiding all the rest.
Hope that's a little bit more clear now.
Edit:
Of course there are other good reasons for using DTOs instead of Entities, this is only an introductory explanation to the subject.
Recently I was working on a little RESTful API using Spring and I came across the ModelAttribute annotation.
I noticed that there is some very interesting behavior associated with it, mainly the fact that you can stick it onto a method and it will get called before the handler for a given request is called, allowing you to do anything before data is bound to the arguments of your handler method.
One usage that comes to mind is default values:
#ModelAttribute("defaultEntity")
public Entity defaultEntity() {
final var entity = new Entity();
entity.setName("default name");
return entity;
}
#PostMapping("/entity")
public Entity createNewEntity(#Valid #ModelAttribute("defaultEntity") Entity entity) {
dao.saveEntity(entity);
return entity;
}
In this case, when a POST request comes to /entity, the first thing that will happen is that defaultEntity will get called, creating an entity with some default values pre-filled. Then, Spring will bind the incoming data into it (potentially overwriting the defaults or keeping them as-is) and then pass it into the createNewEntity handler. This is actually pretty nice, IMO.
Another surprising fact is that the annotated method can actually take parameters in much the same way as the handler method. A simple way to do partial entity updates could be something like this:
// first fetch the original entity from the database
#ModelAttribute("originalEntity")
public Entity originalEntity(#PathVariable("id") long id ) {
return dao.getEntity(id);
}
// then let Spring bind data to the entity and validate it
#PostMapping("/entity/{id}")
public Entity updateEntity(#Valid #ModelAttribute("originalEntity") Entity entity) {
// and finally we save it
dao.saveEntity(entity);
return entity;
}
Again, this is surprisingly easy.
Even more surprising is that different model attributes can depend on each other, so you can have a complicated multi-stage monster if you want:
// first fetch the original entity from the database
#ModelAttribute("originalEntity")
public Entity originalEntity(#PathVariable("id") long id ) {
return dao.getEntity(id);
}
// then let Spring bind data to the entity, validate it and do some processing to it
#ModelAttribute("boundAndValidatedEntity")
public Entity boundAndValidatedEntity(#Valid #ModelAttribute("originalEntity") Entity entity) {
processEntity(entity);
return entity;
}
// finally check that the entity is still valid and then save it
#PostMapping("/entity/{id}")
public Entity updateEntity(#Valid #ModelAttribute(value = "boundAndValidatedEntity", binding = false) Entity entity) {
dao.saveEntity(entity);
return entity;
}
Obviously not all of the model attributes have to be of the same type, some can depend on multiple arguments from different places. It's like a mini-DI container within a single controller.
However, there are some drawbacks:
as far as I can tell, it only works with query parameters and there is no way to make it work with other kinds of request parameters, such as the request body or path variables
all of the ModelAttribute-annotated methods within a single controller will always be called, which can
have a performance impact
be annoying to work with, since Spring will need to be able to gather all of the method's arguments (which may be impossible, for example when they reference a path variable that doesn't exist in the current request)
So, while ModelAttribute doesn't really seem too useful by itself because of these issues, I feel like the main idea behind it - essentially allowing you to control the construction of a method's parameter before it's bound/validated while being able to easily access other request parameters - is solid and could be very useful.
So, my question is simple - is there anything in Spring that would essentially act like ModelAttribute but without the drawbacks that I mentioned? Or maybe in some 3rd party library? Or maybe I could write something like this myself?
I need in metainfo for entity (hierarchy level from recursive sql query) so i created next projection
#Value
public class ProjectionObject{
MyEntity entity;
int metainfo;
}
#Query(value = "select my_entity.*, 1 as metainfo from my_entities", nativeQuery = true)
List<ProjectionObject> findSome();
But it returns List<List> but i expect List.
As result i what to manipulate with ProjectionObject#entity as with managed (by Entity Manager) ProjectionObject#entity, in other word i want to get managed entity with metainfo once without getting f.e. hierarchy Ids and after get entities
I'm not sure Spring Data Projections supports that.
However, this is a 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.
A projection with Entity Views could look as simple as the following
#EntityView(MyEntity.class)
interface ProjectionObject {
#Mapping("this")
MyEntity getEntity();
#Mapping("1")
int getMetaInfo();
}
Querying is a matter of applying the entity view to a query, the simplest being just a query by id.
ProjectionObject dto = entityViewManager.find(entityManager, ProjectionObject.class, id);
But 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
List<ProjectionObject> findAll();
You can also make use of updatable entity views which allows you to eliminate the entity type completely, which reduces the amount of data fetched and flush back only the parts that you actually want to change:
#UpdatableEntityView
#EntityView(MyEntity.class)
interface ProjectionObject {
#IdMapping
Integer getId();
String getName();
void setName(String name);
#Mapping("1")
int getMetaInfo();
}
Now you can fetch that object and then after changing the state flush it back to the database:
ProjectionObject o = repository.findOne(123);
o.setName(o.getName().toUpperCase());
repository.save(o);
And it will only flush back the name as you will see in the SQL.
I have an issue with mapping HQL query to complex DTO. By complex DTO I mean DTO that composites another DTOs / collection DTOs. I tried to find solution but didn't find anything that can suit my requirements. For instance there is a DTO (I omit properties for simplicity):
public class Consignment {
private List<OrderData> orderData;
private List<AttributesData> attributesData;
private CostData costData;
public Consignment(List<OrderData> orderData, List<AttributesData> attributesData, CostData costData) {
//setting fields
}
}
The HQL lets to create DTO object through constructor by passing columns from result set as parameters. Is it possible to create subqueries or smth. Else to fetch data in collection and then pass it as arguments in main DTO? It looks that it is impossible but maybe I missed something.
Otherwise there is only the way to do that is to fetch data in separate HQL queries and then create main DTO as plain Java object. If anyone has alternative ideas how to do that - please share your ideas.
You can fetch other data in the same query like this:
FROM Consignment cons JOIN FETCH cons.orderData ord
I created Blaze-Persistence Entity Views for exactly that use case. You essentially define DTOs for JPA entities as interfaces and apply them on a query. It supports mapping nested DTOs, collection etc., essentially everything you'd expect and on top of that, it will improve your query performance as it will generate queries fetching just the data that you actually require for the DTOs.
The entity views for you example could look like this
#EntityView(ConsignmentEntity.class)
interface Consignment {
List<OrderData> getOrderData();
List<AttributesData> getAttributesData();
CostData getCostData();
}
#EntityView(OrderDataEntity.class)
interface OrderData {
// attributes of OrderDataEntity that you need
}
#EntityView(AttributesDataEntity.class)
interface AttributesData {
// attributes of AttributesDataEntity that you need
}
#EntityView(CostDataEntity.class)
interface CostData {
// attributes of CostDataEntity that you need
}
Querying could look like this
List<Consignment> dtos = entityViewManager.applySetting(
EntityViewSetting.create(Consignment.class),
criteriaBuilderFactory.create(em, ConsignmentEntity.class)
).getResultList();
I'm refactoring a code base to get rid of SQL statements and primitive access and modernize with Spring Data JPA (backed by hibernate). I do use QueryDSL in the project for other uses.
I have a scenario where the user can "mass update" a ton of records, and select some values that they want to update. In the old way, the code manually built the update statement with an IN statement for the where for the PK (which items to update), and also manually built the SET clauses (where the options in SET clauses can vary depending on what the user wants to update).
In looking at QueryDSL documentation, it shows that it supports what I want to do. http://www.querydsl.com/static/querydsl/4.1.2/reference/html_single/#d0e399
I tried looking for a way to do this with Spring Data JPA, and haven't had any luck. Is there a repostitory interface I'm missing, or another library that is required....or would I need to autowire a queryFactory into a custom repository implementation and very literally implement the code in the QueryDSL example?
You can either write a custom method or use #Query annotation.
For custom method;
public interface RecordRepository extends RecordRepositoryCustom,
CrudRepository<Record, Long>
{
}
public interface RecordRepositoryCustom {
// Custom method
void massUpdateRecords(long... ids);
}
public class RecordRepositoryImpl implements RecordRepositoryCustom {
#Override
public void massUpdateRecords(long... ids) {
//implement using em or querydsl
}
}
For #Query annotation;
public interface RecordRepository extends CrudRepository<Record, Long>
{
#Query("update records set someColumn=someValue where id in :ids")
void massUpdateRecords(#Param("ids") long... ids);
}
There is also #NamedQuery option if you want your model class to be reusable with custom methods;
#Entity
#NamedQuery(name = "Record.massUpdateRecords", query = "update records set someColumn=someValue where id in :ids")
#Table(name = "records")
public class Record {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long id;
//rest of the entity...
}
public interface RecordRepository extends CrudRepository<Record, Long>
{
//this will use the namedquery
void massUpdateRecords(#Param("ids") long... ids);
}
Check repositories.custom-implementations, jpa.query-methods.at-query and jpa.query-methods.named-queries at spring data reference document for more info.
This question is quite interesting for me because I was solving this very problem in my current project with the same technology stack mentioned in your question. Particularly we were interested in the second part of your question:
where the options in SET clauses can vary depending on what the user
wants to update
I do understand this is the answer you probably do not want to get but we did not find anything out there :( Spring data is quite cumbersome for update operations especially when it comes to their flexibility.
After I saw your question I tried to look up something new for spring and QueryDSL integration (you know, maybe something was released during past months) but nothing was released.
The only thing that brought me quite close is .flush in entity manager meaning you could follow the following scenario:
Get ids of entities you want to update
Retrieve all entities by these ids (first actual query to db)
Modify them in any way you want
Call entityManager.flush resulting N separate updates to database.
This approach results N+1 actual queries to database where N = number of ids needed to be updated. Moreover you are moving the data back and forth which is actually not good too.
I would advise to
autowire a queryFactory into a custom repository
implementation
Also, have a look into spring data and querydsl example. However you will find only lookup examples.
Hope my pessimistic answer helps :)