JPA: Adding new entry to a many-to-many taking long time

JPA: Adding new entry to a many-to-many taking long time - java

im having a problem when adding a new entry in a many-to-many relationship because the list is huge. Ex:
Item item = new Item(1);
Category cat = dao.find(1, Category.class);
List<Category> list = new ArrayList<>();
list.add(cat);
item.setCategoryList(list);
cat.getItemList().add(item);
The problem is that the Category Itens list is huge, with a lot of itens, so performing the cat.getItemList() takes a very long time. Everywhere i look for the correct way to add a many-to-many entry says that a need to do that. Can someone help?
Edit:
A little context: I organize my itens with tags, so 1 item can have multiple tags and 1 tag can have multiple itens, the time has pass and now i have tags with a lot of itens ( > 5.000), and now when i save a new item with one of thoses tags it takes a long time, i have debuged my code and found that most of the delay is in the cat.getItensList() line, with makes sense since it has a extensive list o itens. I have searched a lot for how to do this, and everyone says that the correct way to save a entry in a many-to-many case is to add to the list on both sides of the relationship, but if one side is huge, it will takes a lot of time since calling the getItensList() loads them in the context. Im looking for a way to save my item refering the tag witout loading all of the itens of that tag.
Edit 2:
My classes:
Item:
#Entity
#Table(name = "transacao")
#XmlRootElement
public class Transacao implements Serializable {
#ManyToMany(mappedBy = "transacaoList")
private List<Tagtransacao> tagtransacaoList;
...(other stuff)
}
Tag:
#Entity
#Table(name = "tagtransacao")
#XmlRootElement
public class Tagtransacao implements Serializable {
#JoinTable(name = "transacao_has_tagtransacao", joinColumns = {
#JoinColumn(name = "tagtransacao_idTagTransacao", referencedColumnName = "idTagTransacao")}, inverseJoinColumns = {
#JoinColumn(name = "transacao_idTransacao", referencedColumnName = "idTransacao")})
#ManyToMany
private List<Transacao> transacaoList;
...(other stuff)
}
Edit 3:
WHAT I DID TO SOLVE:
As answered by Ariel Kohan, i tried to do a NativeQuery to insert the relationship:
Query query = queryDAO.criarNativeQuery("INSERT INTO " + config.getNomeBanco() + ".`transacao_has_tagtransacao` "
+ "(`transacao_idTransacao`, `tagtransacao_idTagTransacao`) VALUES (:idTransacao, :idTag);");
query.setParameter("idTransacao", transacao.getIdTransacao());
query.setParameter("idTag", tag.getIdTagTransacao());
I was able to reduce the time of que query from 10s to 300milis what it is impressive. In the end its better for my project that it is already runnig to do that instead of creating a new class that represents the many-to-many reletionship. Thanks to everyone who tried to help \o/

In this case, I would prevent your code from load the item list in memory.
To do that, I can think about two options:
Using a #Modyfing query to insert the items directly in the DB.
[Recommended for cases where you want to avoid changing your model]
You can try to create the query using normal JPQL but, depending on your model, you may need to use a native query. Using native query would be something like this:
#Query(value = "insert into ...", nativeQuery = true)
void addItemToCategory(#Param("param1") Long param1, ...);
After creating this query, you will need to update your code removing the parts where you load the objects in memory and adding the parts to call the insert statements.
[Update]
As you mentioned in a comment, doing this improved your performance from 10s to 300milis.
Modify your Entities in order to replace #ManyToMany with #OneToManys relationship
The idea in this solution is to replace a ManyToMany relationship between entities A and B with an intermediate entity RelationAB. I think you can do this in two ways:
Save only the Ids from A and B in RelationAB as a composite key (of course you can add other fields like a Date or whatever you want).
Add an auto-generated Id to RelationAB and add A and B as other fields in the RelationAB entity.
I did an example using the first option (you will see that the classes are not public, this is just because I decided to do it in a single file for the sake of simplicity. Of course, you can do it in multiple files and with public classes if you want):
Entities A and B:
#Entity
class EntityA {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long id;
public EntityA() {
}
public Long getId() {
return id;
}
public void setId(Long id) {
this.id = id;
}
}
#Entity
class EntityB {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long id;
public EntityB() {
}
public Long getId() {
return id;
}
public void setId(Long id) {
this.id = id;
}
}
RelationABEntity and RelationABId:
#Embeddable
class RelationABId implements Serializable {
private Long entityAId;
private Long entityBId;
public RelationABId() {
}
public RelationABId(Long entityAId, Long entityBId) {
this.entityAId = entityAId;
this.entityBId = entityBId;
}
public Long getEntityAId() {
return entityAId;
}
public void setEntityAId(Long entityAId) {
this.entityAId = entityAId;
}
public Long getEntityBId() {
return entityBId;
}
public void setEntityBId(Long entityBId) {
this.entityBId = entityBId;
}
}
#Entity
class RelationABEntity {
#EmbeddedId
private RelationABId id;
public RelationABEntity() {
}
public RelationABEntity(Long entityAId, Long entityBId) {
this.id = new RelationABId(entityAId, entityBId);
}
public RelationABId getId() {
return id;
}
public void setId(RelationABId id) {
this.id = id;
}
}
My Repositories:
#Repository
interface RelationABEntityRepository extends JpaRepository<RelationABEntity, RelationABId> {
}
#Repository
interface ARepository extends JpaRepository<EntityA, Long> {
}
#Repository
interface BRepository extends JpaRepository<EntityB, Long> {
}
A test:
#RunWith(SpringRunner.class)
#DataJpaTest
public class DemoApplicationTest {
#Autowired RelationABEntityRepository relationABEntityRepository;
#Autowired ARepository aRepository;
#Autowired BRepository bRepository;
#Test
public void test(){
EntityA a = new EntityA();
a = aRepository.save(a);
EntityB b = new EntityB();
b = bRepository.save(b);
//Entities A and B in the DB at this point
RelationABId relationABID = new RelationABId(a.getId(), b.getId());
final boolean relationshipExist = relationABEntityRepository.existsById(relationABID);
assertFalse(relationshipExist);
if(! relationshipExist){
RelationABEntity relation = new RelationABEntity(a.getId(), b.getId());
relationABEntityRepository.save(relation);
}
final boolean relationshipExitNow = relationABEntityRepository.existsById(relationABID);
assertTrue(relationshipExitNow);
/**
* As you can see, modifying your model you can create relationships without loading big list and without complex queries.
*/
}
}
The code above explains another way to handle this kind of things. Of course, you can make modifications according to what you exactly need.
Hope this helps :)

This is basically copied from a similar answer I gave earlier but similar question as well. The code below ran when I first write it but I changed the names to match this question so there might be some typos. The spring-data-jpa is a layer on top of JPA. Each entity has its own repository and you have to deal with that. For dealing with the many-to-many relations specifically in spring-data-jpa you can make a separate repository for the link table if you think it's a good idea.
#Entity
public class Item {
#Id #GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Long id;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "item", cascade = CascadeType.ALL, orphanRemoval = true)
private List<ItemCategory> categories;
#Entity
public class Category {
#Id #GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Long id;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "category", cascade = CascadeType.ALL, orphanRemoval = true)
private List<ItemCategory> items;
#Entity
public class ItemCategory {
#EmbeddedId
private ItemcategoryId id = new ItemcategoryId();
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#MapsId("itemId")
private Item Item;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#MapsId("categoryId")
private Category category;
public ItemCategory() {}
public ItemCategory(Item Item, Category category) {
this.item = item;
this.category = category;
}
#SuppressWarnings("serial")
#Embeddable
public class ItemCategoryId implements Serializable {
private Long itemId;
private Long categoryId;
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o)
return true;
if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass())
return false;
ItemCategoryId that = (ItemCategoryId) o;
return Objects.equals(itemId, that.itemId) && Objects.equals(categoryId, that.categoryId);
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return Objects.hash(itemId, categoryId);
}
And to use it. Step 3 shows the way you are currently doing it and creates a read of the existing joins before doing the update. Step 4 just inserts a relation directly in the join table and does not cause a pre-read of the existing joins.
#Transactional
private void update() {
System.out.println("Step 1");
Category category1 = new Category();
Item item1 = new Item();
ItemCategory i1c1 = new ItemCategory(Item1, Category1);
categoryRepo.save(Category1);
ItemRepo.save(Item1);
ItemCategoryRepo.save(p1t1);
System.out.println("Step 2");
Category category2 = new Category();
Item item2 = new Item();
ItemCategory p2t2 = new ItemCategory(item2, category2);
ItemRepo.save(item2);
categoryRepo.save(category2);
ItemCategoryRepo.save(p2t2);
System.out.println("Step 3");
category2 = CategoryRepo.getOneWithitems(2L);
category2.getitems().add(new ItemCategory(item1, category2));
categoryRepo.save(Category2);
System.out.println("Step 4 -- better");
ItemCategory i2c1 = new ItemCategory(item2, category1);
itemCategoryRepo.save(i2c1);
}
I don't explicitly set the ItemCategoryId id's. These are handled by the persistence layer (hibernate in this case).
Note also that you can update ItemCategory entries either explicity with its own repo or by adding and removing them from the list since CascadeType.ALL is set, as shown. The problem with using the CascadeType.ALL for spring-data-jpa is that even though you prefetch the join table entities spring-data-jpa will do it again anyway. Trying to update the relationship through the CascadeType.ALL for new entities is problematic.
Without the CascadeType neither the items or categories lists (which should be Sets) are the owners of the relationship so adding to them wouldn't accomplish anything in terms of persistence and would be for query results only.
When reading the ItemCategory relationships you need to specifically fetch them since you don't have FetchType.EAGER. The problem with FetchType.EAGER is the overhead if you don't want the joins and also if you put it on both Category and Item then you will create a recursive fetch that gets all categories and items for any query.
#Query("select c from Category c left outer join fetch c.items is left outer join fetch is.Item where t.id = :id")
Category getOneWithItems(#Param("id") Long id);

Related

Why do I have to sync a bidirectional relationship even with CascadeType.PERSIST using Spring Data JPA

Here is an example code demonstrating the issue:
The Meal Entity:
#Entity
public class Meal {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private long id;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "meal", cascade = CascadeType.PERSIST)
private Collection<Food> foods;
public Meal() {
foods = new HashSet<>();
}
public Collection<Food> getFoods() {
return foods;
}
public void addFood(Food food) {
foods.add(food);
// without this the `meal_id` column is null
food.setMeal(this);
}
}
The Food Entity:
#Entity
public class Food {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private long id;
#ManyToOne
private Meal meal;
public long getId() {
return id;
}
public void setId(long id) {
this.id = id;
}
public Meal getMeal() {
return meal;
}
public void setMeal(Meal meal) {
this.meal = meal;
}
}
And here is the code that creates and saves the entities:
Meal meal = new Meal();
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
meal.addFood(new Food());
}
mealRepository.save(meal);
Both the Meal and the Food entities are persisted thanks to the CascadeType.PERSIST, but the meal_id column stays null if I don't explicitly set the meal field to the Meal entity.
This is not the behavior I'd expect, and I'm wondering why isn't this automatically done for me.

#Entity
public class Meal {
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "meal", cascade = CascadeType.PERSIST)
private Collection<Food> foods;
}
The mappedBy here means that the value of meal field in Food is used to provide the value for the corresponding database column that link between Food and Meal (i.e. meal_id column in Food table). So if you do not set it, it will always remain NULL.
On the other hand, without mappedBy means that the value of the foods field in Meal is used to provide the value for meal_id column. The reason of manually syncing them is just to have a consistent OOP model to work with.
CascadeType.PERSIST is nothing to do with setting the value of the entity. It will never update the value of the entities for you. What it helps is to automatically calling some entityManager methods on the related entities. Without it, you have to call the following to save all Food and Meal:
entityManager.persist(meal);
entityManager.persist(food1);
entityManager.persist(food2);
......
entityManager.persist(foodN);
With it , you just need to call
entityManager.persist(meal);
and the rest of entityManager.persist(foodN) will be 'cascaded' to call automatically.
So in term of spring-data-jpa , instead of calling
mealRepository.save(meal);
foodRepository.persist(food1);
foodRepository.persist(food2);
......
foodRepository.persist(foodN);
You just need to call
mealRepository.save(meal);

Java JPA Mapping Problem with nested Collections

I have the following problem: I have three connected classes. I have annotated them but I am getting wrong results (described below):
#Entityd
#Table(name = "ClassA")
public class ClassA{
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long id = 0L;
...
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER,cascade=CascadeType.ALL)
#Fetch(FetchMode.SELECT)
#Column(name = "ClassBList")
private List<ClassB> listB;
...
}
#Entity
#Table(name="ClassB")
public class ClassB {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long id = 0L;
...
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
#Fetch(FetchMode.SELECT)
#Column(name = "ClassCList")
private List<ClassC> listC;
...
}
#Entity
#Table(name="ClassC")
public class ClassC {
#Id
#GeneratedValue()
private Long id = 0L;
...
#ElementCollection
private List<String> listD;
...
}
When I work with this structure for the first ClassA I create,save and load everything is ok. For a new instance of ClassA which I save to repo and load again, I suddenly have the strings of the first ClassA in listD.
The result I need is that every class is "independently" saved. So the collections of each class should hold unique (each one with its own id and sublists) objects.
What would be the best way (annotations) to model this classes in Java 8 with Spring Boot 2.2.0.M5 and javax.persistence-api 2.2 ?
EDIT:
I have now removed class B and rewrote classA to:
#Entity
#Table(name = "ClassA")
public class ClassA{
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long id = 0L;
...
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, orphanRemoval = true, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#MapKey(name = "type")
private Map<String,Set<ClassC>> classCmap;
...
}
This is giving me an error like:
org.hibernate.AnnotationException: Use of #OneToMany or #ManyToMany targeting an unmapped class
How can I model/solve/annotate this?

If you don't need to query data based on listD, I would suggest to keep the list as text in the database and use a converter:
#Converter
public class ListDConverter implements AttributeConverter<List<String>, String> {
private ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
#Override
public String convertToDatabaseColumn(List<String> listD) {
try {
return objectMapper.writeValueAsString(listD);
} catch(IOException e){
return null;
}
}
#Override
public List<String> convertToEntityAttribute(String stringListD) {
if(stringListD == null){
return Collections.emptyList();
}
try {
return objectMapper.readValue(stringListD, new TypeReference<List<String>>() {});
}catch(IOException e){
return Collections.emptyList();
}
}
}
and in your ClassC entity class :
#Convert(converter = ListDConverter.class)
private List<String> listD;
Why do I like this approach :
No extra table and joins => better performance
Easier to read listD in the database

#ElementCollection describes a table. So your code is probably creating a "listD" table with one column of type string, with no primary key.
Also, do you really want to use the SELECT fetch mode? That's going to generate 1 + b + b*c queries when you could just implement your data as sets (since you have unique identifiers) and use JOIN, which would result in one and only one query.
See this site for an explanation on how to use #ElementCollection.

hibernate inheritance : How to protect base class entry on child class deletion

I have some trouble with Hibernate 4 and inheritance:
I use a ChildData class which inherit from BaseData by a JOIN inheritance strategy. My mapping is done by annotation in classes.
Everything is working fine except that when I delete a ChildData instance (with session.delete() or with a Hql query) the BaseData entry is also deleted.
I understand that in most case this is the awaited behavior, but for my particular case, I would like to preserve the BaseData entry no matter what for history purpose.
In other words I want all actions on the child class to be cascaded to base class except deletion.
I have already tried #OnCascade on the child class, with no success.
Is it a way to achieve this by code or do I have to use a SQL Trigger ON DELETE ?
EDIT :
Base Class
#Entity
#Table(name = "dbBenchHistory", uniqueConstraints = #UniqueConstraint(columnNames = "Name"))
#Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.JOINED )
public class DbBenchHistory implements java.io.Serializable {
private int id;
private String name;
private String computer;
private String eap;
private Date lastConnexion;
private Set<DbPlugin> dbPlugins = new HashSet<DbPlugin>(0);
private Set<DbSequenceResult> dbSequenceResults = new HashSet<DbSequenceResult>(
0);
public DbBenchHistory() {
}
public DbBenchHistory(int id, String name) {
this.id = id;
this.name = name;
}
public DbBenchHistory(int id, String name, String computer, String eap,
Date lastConnexion, Set<DbPlugin> dbPlugins,
Set<DbSequenceResult> dbSequenceResults) {
this.id = id;
this.name = name;
this.computer = computer;
this.eap = eap;
this.lastConnexion = lastConnexion;
this.dbPlugins = dbPlugins;
this.dbSequenceResults = dbSequenceResults;
}
#Id
#Column(name = "Id", unique = true, nullable = false)
#GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.IDENTITY)
public int getId() {
return this.id;
}
public void setId(int id) {
this.id = id;
}
//Getters/Setters
Child Class :
#Entity
#Table(name = "dbBench")
#OnDelete(action=OnDeleteAction.NO_ACTION)
public class DbBench extends DbBenchHistory {
private Set<DbProgram> dbPrograms = new HashSet<DbProgram>(0);
private Set<DbUser> dbUsers = new HashSet<DbUser>(0);
public DbBench() {
}
public DbBench(Set<DbProgram> dbPrograms,
Set<DbUser> dbUsers) {
this.dbPrograms = dbPrograms;
this.dbUsers = dbUsers;
}
//Getters/Setters
But I'm starting to think that I was wrong from the beginning and that inheritance was not the good way to handle this. If nothing shows up I will just go for BenchHistory - Bench being a simple one-to-one relationship
EDIT2 :
I edit while I can't answer my own question for insuficient reputation
I feel completly stupid now that I found the solution, that was so simple :
As I said, I was using hibernate managed methods : session.delete() or hql query. Hibernate was doing what he was supposed to do by deletintg the parent class, like it would have been in object inheritance.
So I just bypass hibernate by doing the deletion of the child class with one of the simplest SqlQuery on earth. And the base class entry remain untouched.
I understand that I somehow violate the object inheritance laws, but in my case it is really handy.
Thanks to everyone for your time, and believ me when I say I'm sorry.

I don't think Hibernate/JPA supports this. What you basically want is conversion from a subclass to a superclass, and not a cascading delete. When you have an object of the subclass, the members from the superclass are treated no different than the members of the subclass.
This can be solved through writing some logic for it though:
public void deleteKeepSuperclassObject(final ChildData childData) {
final BaseData baseDataToKeep = new BaseData();
//populate baseDataToKeep with data from the childData to remove
em.persist(baseDataToKeep);
em.remove(childData);
}

Delete Not Working with JpaRepository

I have a spring 4 app where I'm trying to delete an instance of an entity from my database. I have the following entity:
#Entity
public class Token implements Serializable {
#Id
#SequenceGenerator(name = "seqToken", sequenceName = "SEQ_TOKEN", initialValue = 500, allocationSize = 1)
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.SEQUENCE, generator = "seqToken")
#Column(name = "TOKEN_ID", nullable = false, precision = 19, scale = 0)
private Long id;
#NotNull
#Column(name = "VALUE", unique = true)
private String value;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinColumn(name = "USER_ACCOUNT_ID", nullable = false)
private UserAccount userAccount;
#Temporal(TemporalType.TIMESTAMP)
#Column(name = "EXPIRES", length = 11)
private Date expires;
...
// getters and setters omitted to keep it simple
}
I have a JpaRepository interface defined:
public interface TokenRepository extends JpaRepository<Token, Long> {
Token findByValue(#Param("value") String value);
}
I have a unit test setup that works with an in memory database (H2) and I am pre-filling the database with two tokens:
#Test
public void testDeleteToken() {
assertThat(tokenRepository.findAll().size(), is(2));
Token deleted = tokenRepository.findOne(1L);
tokenRepository.delete(deleted);
tokenRepository.flush();
assertThat(tokenRepository.findAll().size(), is(1));
}
The first assertion passes, the second fails. I tried another test that changes the token value and saves that to the database and it does indeed work, so I'm not sure why delete isn't working. It doesn't throw any exceptions either, just doesn't persist it to the database. It doesn't work against my oracle database either.
Edit
Still having this issue. I was able to get the delete to persist to the database by adding this to my TokenRepository interface:
#Modifying
#Query("delete from Token t where t.id = ?1")
void delete(Long entityId);
However this is not an ideal solution. Any ideas as to what I need to do to get it working without this extra method?

Most probably such behaviour occurs when you have bidirectional relationship and you're not synchronizing both sides WHILE having both parent and child persisted (attached to the current session).
This is tricky and I'm gonna explain this with the following example.
#Entity
public class Parent {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "id", unique = true, nullable = false)
private Long id;
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.PERSIST, mappedBy = "parent")
private Set<Child> children = new HashSet<>(0);
public void setChildren(Set<Child> children) {
this.children = children;
this.children.forEach(child -> child.setParent(this));
}
}
#Entity
public class Child {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "id", unique = true, nullable = false)
private Long id;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "parent_id")
private Parent parent;
public void setParent(Parent parent) {
this.parent = parent;
}
}
Let's write a test (a transactional one btw)
public class ParentTest extends IntegrationTestSpec {
#Autowired
private ParentRepository parentRepository;
#Autowired
private ChildRepository childRepository;
#Autowired
private ParentFixture parentFixture;
#Test
public void test() {
Parent parent = new Parent();
Child child = new Child();
parent.setChildren(Set.of(child));
parentRepository.save(parent);
Child fetchedChild = childRepository.findAll().get(0);
childRepository.delete(fetchedChild);
assertEquals(1, parentRepository.count());
assertEquals(0, childRepository.count()); // FAILS!!! childRepostitory.counts() returns 1
}
}
Pretty simple test right? We're creating parent and child, save it to database, then fetching a child from database, removing it and at last making sure everything works just as expected. And it's not.
The delete here didn't work because we didn't synchronized the other part of relationship which is PERSISTED IN CURRENT SESSION. If Parent wasn't associated with current session our test would pass, i.e.
#Component
public class ParentFixture {
...
#Transactional(propagation = Propagation.REQUIRES_NEW)
public void thereIsParentWithChildren() {
Parent parent = new Parent();
Child child = new Child();
parent.setChildren(Set.of(child));
parentRepository.save(parent);
}
}
and
#Test
public void test() {
parentFixture.thereIsParentWithChildren(); // we're saving Child and Parent in seperate transaction
Child fetchedChild = childRepository.findAll().get(0);
childRepository.delete(fetchedChild);
assertEquals(1, parentRepository.count());
assertEquals(0, childRepository.count()); // WORKS!
}
Of course it only proves my point and explains the behaviour OP faced. The proper way to go is obviously keeping in sync both parts of relationship which means:
class Parent {
...
public void dismissChild(Child child) {
this.children.remove(child);
}
public void dismissChildren() {
this.children.forEach(child -> child.dismissParent()); // SYNCHRONIZING THE OTHER SIDE OF RELATIONSHIP
this.children.clear();
}
}
class Child {
...
public void dismissParent() {
this.parent.dismissChild(this); //SYNCHRONIZING THE OTHER SIDE OF RELATIONSHIP
this.parent = null;
}
}
Obviously #PreRemove could be used here.

I had the same problem
Perhaps your UserAccount entity has an #OneToMany with Cascade on some attribute.
I've just remove the cascade, than it could persist when deleting...

You need to add PreRemove function ,in the class where you have many object as attribute e.g in Education Class which have relation with UserProfile
Education.java
private Set<UserProfile> userProfiles = new HashSet<UserProfile>(0);
#ManyToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, mappedBy = "educations")
public Set<UserProfile> getUserProfiles() {
return this.userProfiles;
}
#PreRemove
private void removeEducationFromUsersProfile() {
for (UsersProfile u : usersProfiles) {
u.getEducationses().remove(this);
}
}

One way is to use cascade = CascadeType.ALL like this in your userAccount service:
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
private List<Token> tokens;
Then do something like the following (or similar logic)
#Transactional
public void deleteUserToken(Token token){
userAccount.getTokens().remove(token);
}
Notice the #Transactional annotation. This will allow Spring (Hibernate) to know if you want to either persist, merge, or whatever it is you are doing in the method. AFAIK the example above should work as if you had no CascadeType set, and call JPARepository.delete(token).

This is for anyone coming from Google on why their delete method is not working in Spring Boot/Hibernate, whether it's used from the JpaRepository/CrudRepository's delete or from a custom repository calling session.delete(entity) or entityManager.remove(entity).
I was upgrading from Spring Boot 1.5 to version 2.2.6 (and Hibernate 5.4.13) and had been using a custom configuration for transactionManager, something like this:
#Bean
public HibernateTransactionManager transactionManager(EntityManagerFactory entityManagerFactory) {
return new HibernateTransactionManager(entityManagerFactory.unwrap(SessionFactory.class));
}
And I managed to solve it by using #EnableTransactionManagement and deleting the custom
transactionManager bean definition above.
If you still have to use a custom transaction manager of sorts, changing the bean definition to the code below may also work:
#Bean
public PlatformTransactionManager transactionManager(EntityManagerFactory entityManagerFactory) {
return new JpaTransactionManager(entityManagerFactory);
}
As a final note, remember to enable Spring Boot's auto-configuration so the entityManagerFactory bean can be created automatically, and also remove any sessionFactory bean if you're upgrading to entityManager (otherwise Spring Boot won't do the auto-configuration properly). And lastly, ensure that your methods are #Transactional if you're not dealing with transactions manually.

I was facing the similar issue.
Solution 1:
The reason why the records are not being deleted could be that the entities are still attached. So we've to detach them first and then try to delete them.
Here is my code example:
User Entity:
#Entity
public class User {
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy = "user")
private List<Contact> contacts = new ArrayList<>();
}
Contact Entity:
#Entity
public class Contact {
#Id
private int cId;
#ManyToOne
private User user;
}
Delete Code:
user.getContacts().removeIf(c -> c.getcId() == contact.getcId());
this.userRepository.save(user);
this.contactRepository.delete(contact);
Here we are first removing the Contact object (which we want to delete) from the User's contacts ArrayList, and then we are using the delete() method.
Solution 2:
Here we are using the orphanRemoval attribute, which is used to delete orphaned entities from the database. An entity that is no longer attached to its parent is known as an orphaned entity.
Code example:
User Entity:
#Entity
public class User {
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy = "user", orphanRemoval = true)
private List<Contact> contacts = new ArrayList<>();
}
Contact Entity:
#Entity
public class Contact {
#Id
private int cId;
#ManyToOne
private User user;
}
Delete Code:
user.getContacts().removeIf(c -> c.getcId() == contact.getcId());
this.userRepository.save(user);
Here, as the Contact entity is no longer attached to its parent, it is an orphaned entity and will be deleted from the database.

I just went through this too. In my case, I had to make the child table have a nullable foreign key field and then remove the parent from the relationship by setting null, then calling save and delete and flush.
I didn't see a delete in the log or any exception prior to doing this.

If you use an newer version of Spring Data, you could use deleteBy syntax...so you are able to remove one of your annotations :P
the next thing is, that the behaviour is already tract by a Jira ticket:
https://jira.spring.io/browse/DATAJPA-727

#Transactional
int deleteAuthorByName(String name);
you should write #Transactional in Repository extends JpaRepository

Your initial value for id is 500. That means your id starts with 500
#SequenceGenerator(name = "seqToken", sequenceName = "SEQ_TOKEN",
initialValue = 500, allocationSize = 1)
And you select one item with id 1 here
Token deleted = tokenRepository.findOne(1L);
So check your database to clarify that

I've the same problem, test is ok but on db row isn't deleted.
have you added the #Transactional annotation to method? for me this change makes it work

In my case was the CASCADE.PERSIST, i changed for CASCADE.ALL, and made the change through the cascade (changing the father object).

CascadeType.PERSIST and orphanRemoval=true doesn't work together.

Try calling deleteById instead of delete on the repository. I also noticed that you are providing an Optional entity to the delete (since findOne returns an Optional entity). It is actually strange that you are not getting any compilation errors because of this. Anyways, my thinking is that the repository is not finding the entity to delete.
Try this instead:
#Test
public void testDeleteToken() {
assertThat(tokenRepository.findAll().size(), is(2));
Optional<Token> toDelete = tokenRepository.findOne(1L);
toDelete.ifExists(toDeleteThatExists -> tokenRepository.deleteById(toDeleteThatExists.getId()))
tokenRepository.flush();
assertThat(tokenRepository.findAll().size(), is(1));
}
By doing the above, you can avoid having to add the #Modifying query to your repository (since what you are implementing in that #Modifying query is essentially the same as calling deleteById, which already exists on the JpaRepository interface).

How to avoid cyclic reference annotating with JPA?

I'm annotating my domain model for a shop (with JPA 2, using a Hibernate Provider).
In the shop every product can have a Category. Each category can be assigned to several super- and subcategories, meaning a category "candles" can have "restaurant" and "decoration" as parents and "plain candles" and "multi-wick candles" as children, etc.
Now I want to avoid cyclic references, i. e. a category "a" that has "b" as its parent which in turn has "a" as its parent.
Is there a way to check for cyclic references with a constraint in JPA? Or do I have to write some checks myself, maybe in a #PostPersist-annotated method?
Here's my Category class:
#Entity
public class Category {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long id;
private String name;
#ManyToMany
private Set<Category> superCategories;
#ManyToMany(mappedBy="superCategories")
private Set<Category> subCategories;
public Category() {
}
// And so on ..
}

I believe you would have to check this through a business rule in your code. Why don't you separate these ManyToMany mappings in a separate Entity ? Like for example:
#Entity
#Table(name = "TB_PRODUCT_CATEGORY_ROLLUP")
public class ProductCategoryRollup {
private ProductCategory parent;
private ProductCategory child;
#Id
#GeneratedValue
public Integer getId() {
return super.getId();
}
#Override
public void setId(Integer id) {
super.setId(id);
}
#ManyToOne(fetch=FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name="ID_PRODUCT_CATEGORY_PARENT", nullable=false)
public ProductCategory getParent() {
return parent;
}
public void setParent(ProductCategory parent) {
this.parent = parent;
}
#ManyToOne(fetch=FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name="ID_PRODUCT_CATEGORY_CHILD", nullable=false)
public ProductCategory getChild() {
return child;
}
public void setChild(ProductCategory child) {
this.child = child;
}
}
In this way, you could before Saving a new entity, query for any existing Parent-Child combination.

I know I come back to the problem after several years but, I faced this problem, followed all of your resolutions and it didn't work for me. But I found the best solution using #JsonIgnoreProperties which solved the problem perfectly. In fact, I injected #JsonIgnoreProperties into the entity classes linked by a mapping like here:https://hellokoding.com/handling-circular-reference-of-jpa-hibernate-bidirectional-entity-relationships-with-jackson-jsonignoreproperties/

Develop Reference

Java is a programming language and computing platform first released by Sun Microsystems in 1995.

JPA: Adding new entry to a many-to-many taking long time - java

Related

Why do I have to sync a bidirectional relationship even with CascadeType.PERSIST using Spring Data JPA

Java JPA Mapping Problem with nested Collections

hibernate inheritance : How to protect base class entry on child class deletion

Delete Not Working with JpaRepository

How to avoid cyclic reference annotating with JPA?

Categories

Resources