Could you please help me to get rid of ApplicationContext?
I have a factory so that all book instances are spring-beans.
I think it's a good decision to make all beans spring-beans.
#Component
public class BookFactoryImpl implements BookFactory {
private final ApplicationContext applicationContext;
#Autowired
public BookFactoryImpl(ApplicationContext applicationContext) {
this.applicationContext = applicationContext;
}
#Override
public Book createBook(String name) {
return applicationContext.getBean(Book.class, name);
}
}
Here is a configuration class with a #Beanmethod that is used to instantiate a new instance of Book class:
#Configuration
#ComponentScan({"factory"})
public class AppConfig {
#Bean
#Scope(ConfigurableBeanFactory.SCOPE_PROTOTYPE)
#Lazy
public Book book(String name) {
return Book.builder().name(name).build();
}
}
Here is my Book entity class:
#Entity
#NoArgsConstructor
#AllArgsConstructor
#Getter
#EqualsAndHashCode
#ToString
#Builder
public class Book {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private int id;
#Basic(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
private String name;
}
I have more one idea - to annotate BookFactoryImpl with #Configuration and move #Bean method in it but in this case, my factory will be turned into #Configuration class with the broken lifecycle.
What do you think, what is the best way to implement a factory and how to reduce external dependencies like ApplicationContext?
Or maybe it's nice to make all factories as #Configuration classes with #Bean methods, how do you think?
No, it is not a good idea to make every single class in your application managed by Spring.
JPA entities usually should be instantiated by your code inside Spring managed beans.
I usually use the following approach:
Define the singleton bean that will contain a dependency on factory:
public class MyService {
private final Provider<Book> bookFactory;
public MyService(Provider<Book> bookFactory) {
this.bookFactory = bookFactory;
}
public void doSomething() {
Book book = bookFactory.get();
book.setNumberOfReaders(numOfReaders); // this is a drawback, book is mutable, if we want to set runtime params (like numberOfReaders)
....
}
}
Now Define a prototype for book bean:
#Configuration
public class MyConfiguration {
#Bean
#Scope("prototype")
public Book book(...) {
return new Book(...);
}
#Bean // scope singleton by default
public MyService myService(Provider<Book> bookFactory) {
return new MyService(bookFactory);
}
}
Notice, Provider is of type "javax.inject.Provider", in order to use id, import (for example in maven):
<dependency>
<groupId>javax.inject</groupId>
<artifactId>javax.inject</artifactId>
<version>1</version>
</dependency>
Spring can handle this since 4.x ( I guess 4.1) without any additional configuration
Of course, this approach eliminates that need to inject application context to the factory and in general to maintain a factory
One drawback is that it doesn't allow building the object with arguments, these arguments have to be specified in runtime.
There is also another approach, a runtime generation of sub-class in conjunction with #Lookup annotation, its described Here but IMO Provider approach is better.
Related
Why do we use qualifiers with #Bean when we can have different names for different beans of the same type (class)?
#Bean
#Qualifier("fooConfig")
public Baz method1() {
}
Isn't the following code more clean?
#Bean("fooConfig")
public Baz method1() {
}
If I create two beans of the same type with different names (using #Bean annotation), then can we inject them specifically using the #Qualifier annotation(can be added on field/constructor parameter/setter) in another bean?
#Bean("fooConfig")
public Baz method1(){
}
#Bean("barConfig")
public Baz method2(){
}
// constructor parameter of a different bean
final #Qualifier("fooConfig") Baz myConfig
If the above is true, then where do we use #Qualifier (with #Bean or #Component) instead of giving the bean a name as shown below?
#Bean
#Qualifier("fooConfig")
public Baz method1(){
}
#Bean
#Qualifier("barConfig")
public Baz method2(){
}
// constructor parameter of a different bean
final #Qualifier("fooConfig") Baz myConfig
Beans have names. They don't have qualifiers. #Qualifier is annotation, with which you tell Spring the name of Bean to be injected.
No.
Default Qualifier is the only implementation of the interface(example is below, 4th question) or the only method with a particular return type. You don't need to specify the #Qualifier in that case. Spring is smart enough to find itself.
For example:
#Configuration
public class MyConfiguration {
#Bean
public MyCustomComponent myComponent() {
return new MyCustomComponent();
}
}
If you will try to inject myComponent somewhere, Spring is smart enough to find the bean above. Becaude there is only one Bean with return type MyCustomComponent. But if there was a couple of methods, that would return MyCustomComponent, then you would have to tell Spring which one to inject with #Qualifier annotation.
SIDENOTE: #Bean annotation by default Spring uses the method name as a bean name. You can also assign other name like #Bean("otherComponent").
You have one Interface, and a couple of Classes implementing it. You inject bean of your interface. How can Spring know which Class should be used?
This is you interface:
public interface TestRepository{}
This is your implementation 1:
#Repository
public class Test1Repository implements TestRepository{}
Your implementation 2:
#Repository
public class Test2Repository implements TestRepository{}
Now you are injecting it like:
private final TestRepository testRepository;
public TestServiceImpl(TestRepository testRepository) {
this.testRepository= testRepository;
}
QUESTION! How is Spring supposed to know which class to inject? Test1 or Test2? That's why you tell it with #Qualifier which class.
private final TestRepository testRepository;
public TestServiceImpl(#Qualifier("test1Repository") TestRepository testRepository) {
this.testRepository= testRepository;
}
I Prefer different method to not using #Qualifier
Create common Interface
public interface CommonFooBar{
public String commonFoo();
public String commonBar();
}
Extends to each service
public interface FooService extends CommonFooBar {
}
public interface BarService extends CommonFooBar {
}
Then using it to your class
#Autowired
FooService fooService;
or
#Autowired
BarService barService;
so, we can defined the single responsibility to each interface and This kind of segregation is more readable to every junior.
I quite like a different way of working. Surely if you provide a unique name for your bean, then that is all you need?
Given the example below, its easy to see that Spring will name the beans based on the method name used to create the beans. In other words, if you give your beans sensible names, then the code should become self-explanatory. This also works when injecting beans into other classes.
The end result of this is:
Spring will name your beans based on the method used to create them.
If you import a bean, Spring will try to match on the bean name.
If you try to import a bean that does not match the name, Spring will attempt to match the class.
If your injected field name does not match the bean name and there are more than one instance of your bean, Spring will throw an exception on startup as it won't know which one to inject.
Lets not over-complicate Spring.
#Bean
mqConnectionFactory() {
ConnectionFactory connectionFactory = new MQXAConnectionFactory();
return connectionFactory;
}
#Bean
public ConnectionFactory pooledConnectionFactory(ConnectionFactory mqconnectionFactory) {
JmsPoolConnectionFactory connectionFactory = new JmsPoolConnectionFactory();
connectionFactory.setConnectionFactory(mqConnectionFactory);
return connectionFactory;
}
#Bean
public ConnectionFactory cachingConnectionFactory(ConnectionFactory mqConnectionFactory) {
CachingConnectionFactory connectionFactory = new CachingConnectionFactory();
connectionFactory.setTargetConnectionFactory(mqConnectionFactory);
return connectionFactory;
}
#Bean
public JmsTemplate jmsTemplate(ConnectionFactory cachingConnectionFactory) {
JmsTemplate jmsTemplate = new JmsTemplate();
jmsTemplate.setConnectionFactory(cachingConnectionFactory);
return jmsTemplate;
}
#Bean
public DefaultMessageListenerContainer messageListenerContainer(ConnectionFactory pooledConnectionFactory) {
DefaultMessageListenerContainer container = new DefaultMessageListenerContainer();
container.setConnectionFactory(pooledConnectionFactory);
...
return container;
}
I have the following scenario: A factory interface with 2 implementations, while the second one used as decorator to the first one.
public final class BaseMailFactory implements MailFactory {
#Autowired
private final ClassA classA;
#Autowired
private final ClassB classB;
public Mail createMail(){
.
.
.
}
}
public final class MetricAwareMailFactory implements MailFactory {
private final MailFactory mailFactory;
public Mail createMail(){
var mail = mailFactory.createMail();
return new MetricsAwareMail(mail);
}
}
#Configuration
public class MailFactoryConfiguration {
#Bean
public MailFactory metricsAwareMailFactory(){
return new MetricAwareMailFactory(???);
}
}
The wrapped object previously instantiated through spring container (context), hence all auto wired fields populated successfully. After creation of the second implementation I am struggle to find an elegant way to initialize the first instance without adding multiple implementations to MailFactory interface which leads to application startup errors due to ambiguity.
I know that I can use qualifies for that but they pollute my code.
I am looking for a way to instantiate a class through spring but without actually register it as a bean, in older spring versions I get to use anonymous beans for such purposes.
I found the #Primary annotation useful here:
#Configuration
public class MailFactoryConfiguration {
#Bean
#Lazy
MailFactory baseMailFactory(){
return new BaseMailFactory();
}
#Bean
#Primary
public MailFactory metricsAwareMailFactory(){
return new MetricAwareMailFactory(baseMailFactory());
}
}
I such way, both beans will be created but the primary one will be selected in case of multiple implementations.
I have a component defined with prototype scope. I want to use that component in my service class. I want spring to provide me a new instance of that Bean everytime I call for it.
Component Class:
#Getter
#Setter
#Component
#Scope("prototype")
public class ProtoTypeBean {
//.. Field variables
}
Service Class:
#AllArgsConstructor
#Service
public class ServiceClass {
ProtoTypeBean prototypeBean;
ArrayList<ProtoTypeBean> prototypeBeans;
public void demoMethod(ArrayList<String> someArrayList) {
for(var singleString: someArrayList) {
prototypeBean.setFieldValue(singleString);
prototypeBeans.add(prototypeBean);
}
System.out.println(prototypeBeans.toString());
}
}
By using this configuration, I am getting the same instance of ProtoTypeBean in my prototypeBeans ArrayList. The question is, how would I make Spring understand to give me a new instance of prototypeBean every time I am calling it into the foreach loop?
I found I can use ApplicationContext.getBean() to get a new instance of the Bean in foreach loop but I also heard that it's a bad practice. So kindly help me with the best practice.
Use an ObjectProvider to lazily get the result you want. However the first prototype scoped bean will not be represented in the list of beans as, well they are prototype scoped.
#AllArgsConstructor
#Service
public class ServiceClass {
private final ObjectProvider<ProtoTypeBean> provider;
public void demoMethod(ArrayList<String> someArrayList) {
PrototypeBean pb = provider.getIfUnique();
for(var singleString: someArrayList) {
pb.setFieldValue(singleString);
pb.add(prototypeBean);
}
System.out.println(prototypeBean.toString());
}
}
Also if you don't need all the dependency injection, proxy creation etc. for your object then why bother. There is nothing wrong with just the new keyword in a Spring application. Not everything has to be managed by Spring.
Set up your prototype bean similar to this:
#Getter
#Setter
#Component
#Scope("prototype")
public class ProtoTypeBean {
final private String param;
public ProtoTypeBean(final String p) {
this.param = p;
}
}
Now, in your service class use a BeanFactory to create the beans for you:
#Service
#AllArgsConstructor
public class ServiceClass {
private final BeanFactory factory;
private List<ProtoTypeBean> prototypeBeans;
#Autowired
public ServiceClass(final BeanFactory f) {
this.factory = f;
}
public void demoMethod(List<String> someArrayList) {
this.prototypeBeans = someArrayList
.stream()
.map(param -> factory.getBean(ProtoTypeBean.class, param))
.collect(Collectors.toList());
}
}
I came across this issue recently. I am sure there must be a better way than mine, but this is how I did it:
public class ServiceClass {
ArrayList<ProtoTypeBean> prototypeBeans = new ArrayList<>();
#Autowired
ApplicationContext ctx;
public void demoMethod(ArrayList<String> someArrayList) {
for(var singleString: someArrayList) {
//magic is in below line.. getting a bean from ApplicatioContext.
ProtoTypeBean prototypeBean= ctx.getBean("protoTypeBean"); //Or ctx.getBean(ProtoTypeBean.class);
prototypeBean.setFieldValue(qBean.getFieldValue());
prototypeBeans.add(prototypeBean);
}
System.out.println(prototypeBeans.toString());
}
This way, Spring container always give you a new instance. And it is totally managed by Spring container.
The way you tried it, I tried that as well, but it would always inject one instance at the time of autowiring, hence defeating the purpose of prototyping.
You could have gone the route of using new Keyword. But then that is just regular Java instantiation and I think that new instance is not managed by Spring because it is annotated with #Component instead of #Configuration. I could be wrong here though.
I have a project structure similar to the one linked here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/29583882/1243462 . I have a util library containing a Service class in one JAR, meant to be consumed from another Java library/Maven project. However, my Service class itself uses Constructor Injection. So, where the original question had:
#Service
public class PermissionsService { ... }
I have
#Service
public class PermissionsService {
public PermissionsService(#Autowired PermissionsDao dao) {
//assign private dao field to autowired dao
}
}
And, like the original post, I want to create an instance of PermissionsService and inject it into my client/consumer application. I'm not sure of how to create a Configuration class.
#Configuration
public class PersistenceConfig {
public PermissionsService getPermissionsServiceBean() {
//What goes here?
}
}
For now, I have a workaround where I replaced the #Autowired PermissionsDao constructor argument with a field injection, and having a no-args constructor. This allows me to:
#Configuration
public class PersistenceConfig {
public PermissionsService getPermissionsServiceBean() {
return new PermissionsService();
}
}
But, since Field injection is discouraged, what is the right way to structure this code?
In your main module
#Configuration
#Import(PersistenceConfig.class)
public class ServiceConfig() {
}
In your utils module
#Configuration
#ComponentScan(basePackages = {"path-to-persistence-service-and-any-dependencies"})
public class PersistenceConfig {
}
The fact that you use constructor injection for PermissionsDao should not matter if you get the configuration right.
I'm relatively new to Spring Boot and dependency injection overall, so please forgive any noob things going on here. I'm building an API and am having trouble when injecting dependencies into a POJO resource (DTO).
When I call the method in the POJO this.numComments = commentSvc.getAllForPhoto(this.getId()); I am getting a NullPointerException. However, when I do this from another spring-managed bean and pass the values into the constructor, it works fine.
After reading around, it looks like I need to do something with aspectJ and Load Time Weaving, but I'm not sure what that would look like in my code.
In essence, my approach looks something like this:
PhotoResource.java (POJO)
public class PhotoResource extends BaseRepresentable {
#Autowired
CommentService commentSvc;
private Long id;
private Integer numComments;
PhotoResource(PhotoEntity entity){
super(entity);
this.setId(entity.getId);
this.numComments = commentSvc.getAllForPhoto(this.getId());
}
}
CommentService.java
#Service
public class CommentService{
public List<CommentResource> getAllForPhoto(Long photoId) {
// code to get all comments for photo
}
}
Application.java
#SpringBootApplication
public class Application {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SpringApplication.run(Application.class);
}
}
Spring won't inject the dependency unless you ask the Spring container to manage the bean. In order for commentSvc to be injected into PhotoResource class, you need to annotate it with #Component or #Bean or #Service, e.g.:
#Component
public class PhotoResource extends BaseRepresentable {
#Autowired
CommentService commentSvc;
}
And make sure the package of this class is included into #ComponentScan packages.
Also, the following won't compile:
#Service
public class CommentService(){
You don't need paranthesis to declare a class, it should be:
#Service
public class CommentService{