I have a requirement in my project that all my methods should be either abstract or final (please don't argue this requirement -- I know it's dumb, just assume it's there).
This is a problem with Hibernate mapped entities since Hibernate needs to create proxies in run-time in order to be able to initialize relations when those are lazily loaded. Not being able to override setter methods results in those not being loaded at all (query is indeed executed, but the object is never populated).
As stated in Hibernate's documentation:
If the final class does implement a proper interface, you could alternatively tell Hibernate to use the interface instead when generating the proxies. See Example 4.4, “Proxying an interface in hbm.xml” and Example 4.5, “Proxying an interface in annotations”.
Example:
#Entity #Proxy(proxyClass=ICat.class) public class Cat implements ICat { ... }
So theoretically it's possible to just tell hibernate to implement an interface instead of extending the original class.
I've tried this solution, but my problem comes with the relations themselves. Here's an over-simplified example:
#Entity
#Proxy(proxyClass = ICat.class)
#Table(name = "cat")
public class Cat implements ICat {
#Id
private Long catId;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "cat", fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
private List<Kitten> kittens;
...
}
#Entity
#Proxy(proxyClass = IKitten.class)
#Table(name="kitten")
public class Cat implements IKitten {
#Id
private Long kittenId;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name="catId")
private Cat cat;
...
}
Now if I try to obtain a Cat object, I get a ClassCastException since it is trying to cast an IKitten collection into a Kitten collection. Which leads me to think I should declare relations using interfaces instead of implementations -- which also produces a compilation-time error since my Interfaces are never declared as entities, but the implementations are (which is clearly stated in the example from the documentation).
How can I solve this?
You con use the interface in both one-to-many and many-to-one associations, but you need to supply the actual Class in the targetEntity attribute. The relations should be something like this:
#Entity
#Proxy(proxyClass = ICat.class)
#Table(name = "cat")
public class Cat implements ICat {
#Id
private Long catId;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "cat", fetch = FetchType.LAZY, targetEntity=Cat.class)
private List<IKitten> kittens;
...
}
#Entity
#Proxy(proxyClass = IKitten.class)
#Table(name="kitten")
public class Cat implements IKitten {
#Id
private Long kittenId;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name="catId", targetEntity=Cat.class)
private ICat cat;
...
}
I had the same requirement before, and bypassed it by declaring final all classes. My hibernate structure was not proxying, and thus I don't know if that will fix the problem, but the requirement. There is a side problem if you are using mockito. Have this in mind.
By the way, there is a typo in the second class shown in your code, it shall be named Kitten
Related
I am currently working on a Spring Boot project and I would like to speed up process of writing the service/data layer boilerplate code (one service and one repository (CrudRepository) for every entity, every one having mostly the same methods).
As of now I am using TABLE_PER_CLASS inheritance in several entities (e.g.: Warehouse and Office are subclasses of Location (an abstract class defining common attributes for all locations).
I would like to define 1 repository and 1 service to manage both Location and its subtypes so I can do something like in my control layer:
#Autowired
LocationsService locationsService;
Warehouse cityWarehouse = new Warehouse();
Office centralOffice = new Office();
locationsService.addNewLocation(cityWarehouse);
locationsService.addNewLocation(centralOffice);
I know I can just use method overloading but I would really like to avoid repeating the same code in situations like this one.
I've also tried using parametric polymorphism:
#Service
public class LocationsService {
#Autowired
LocationsRepository locationsRepository;
public void addNewLocation(Location location) {
locationsRepository.save(location);
}
}
Unfortunately this won't work as Spring can't tell if I want to save a Location or a Warehouse object:
nested exception is org.springframework.orm.jpa.JpaObjectRetrievalFailureException:
Unable to find com.test.springboot.entities.locations.Location with id 55db6993-8a58-4e3a-a6ab-d60d93ab6182; nested exception is javax.persistence.EntityNotFoundException: Unable to find com.test.springboot.entities.locations.Location with id 55db6993-8a58-4e3a-a6ab-d60d93ab6182
I need to use concrete Location objects so using #MappedSuperclass is not an option.
Is there something I am missing? Is it even posible to achieve what I want?
Please note that I am fairly new to Spring Boot so maybe there's something obvious I don't know about yet.
I got it working thanks to some of the comments and after briefly reading the JPA specification.
Because I wanted to use my superclasses as entities I ended up using SINGLE_TABLE inheritance.
For example, this is the Location entity:
#Entity
#Data
#Accessors(chain = true)
#Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.SINGLE_TABLE)
#DiscriminatorColumn(name = "location_type")
public class Location {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long id;
// Skipped
}
The key here is to use #DiscriminatorColumn with SINGLE_TABLE inheritance in the parent class and add #DiscriminatorValue in the correspondent subclasses:
#Entity
#Data #Accessors(chain = true)
#DiscriminatorValue("warehouse_location")
public class Warehouse extends Location {
#JoinColumn(name = "INTERNAL_ROUTE_ID")
#OneToOne(orphanRemoval = true)
private Route internalRoute;
#JoinColumn(name = "EXTERNAL_WAREHOUSE_ID")
#OneToMany(orphanRemoval = true, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
private List<Warehouse> externalWarehouses;
}
This way, I can define LocationsRepository as:
public interface LocationsRepository extends CrudRepository<Location, Long> {
Warehouse findByCityIgnoreCase(String city);
}
Also note that subclass-specific methods can be defined here as long as its return type is explicitly specified (otherwise the method would return ALL Locations, not just the Warehouses).
Finally, in the service layer I can make the relevant methods return any entity just by downcasting the result of the repository call into the appropriate subclass
First, here are my entities.
Player :
#Entity
#JsonIdentityInfo(generator=ObjectIdGenerators.UUIDGenerator.class,
property="id")
public class Player {
// other fields
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "pla_fk_n_teamId")
private Team team;
// methods
}
Team :
#Entity
#JsonIdentityInfo(generator=ObjectIdGenerators.UUIDGenerator.class,
property="id")
public class Team {
// other fields
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "team")
private List<Player> members;
// methods
}
As many topics already stated, you can avoid the StackOverflowExeption in your WebService in many ways with Jackson.
That's cool and all but JPA still constructs an entity with infinite recursion to another entity before the serialization. This is just ugly ans the request takes much longer. Check this screenshot : IntelliJ debugger
Is there a way to fix it ? Knowing that I want different results depending on the endpoint. Examples :
endpoint /teams/{id} => Team={id..., members=[Player={id..., team=null}]}
endpoint /members/{id} => Player={id..., team={id..., members=null}}
Thank you!
EDIT : maybe the question isn't very clear giving the answers I get so I'll try to be more precise.
I know that it is possible to prevent the infinite recursion either with Jackson (#JSONIgnore, #JsonManagedReference/#JSONBackReference etc.) or by doing some mapping into DTO. The problem I still see is this : both of the above are post-query processing. The object that Spring JPA returns will still be (for example) a Team, containing a list of players, containing a team, containing a list of players, etc. etc.
I would like to know if there is a way to tell JPA or the repository (or anything) to not bind entities within entities over and over again?
Here is how I handle this problem in my projects.
I used the concept of data transfer objects, implemented in two version: a full object and a light object.
I define a object containing the referenced entities as List as Dto (data transfer object that only holds serializable values) and I define a object without the referenced entities as Info.
A Info object only hold information about the very entity itself and not about relations.
Now when I deliver a Dto object over a REST API, I simply put Info objects for the references.
Let's assume I deliever a PlayerDto over GET /players/1:
public class PlayerDto{
private String playerName;
private String playercountry;
private TeamInfo;
}
Whereas the TeamInfo object looks like
public class TeamInfo {
private String teamName;
private String teamColor;
}
compared to a TeamDto
public class TeamDto{
private String teamName;
private String teamColor;
private List<PlayerInfo> players;
}
This avoids an endless serialization and also makes a logical end for your rest resources as other wise you should be able to GET /player/1/team/player/1/team
Additionally, the concept clearly separates the data layer from the client layer (in this case the REST API), as you don't pass the actually entity object to the interface. For this, you convert the actual entity inside your service layer to a Dto or Info. I use http://modelmapper.org/ for this, as it's super easy (one short method call).
Also I fetch all referenced entities lazily. My service method which gets the entity and converts it to the Dto there for runs inside of a transaction scope, which is good practice anyway.
Lazy fetching
To tell JPA to fetch a entity lazily, simply modify your relationship annotation by defining the fetch type. The default value for this is fetch = FetchType.EAGER which in your situation is problematic. That is why you should change it to fetch = FetchType.LAZY
public class TeamEntity {
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "team",fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
private List<PlayerEntity> members;
}
Likewise the Player
public class PlayerEntity {
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "pla_fk_n_teamId")
private TeamEntity team;
}
When calling your repository method from your service layer, it is important, that this is happening within a #Transactional scope, otherwise, you won't be able to get the lazily referenced entity. Which would look like this:
#Transactional(readOnly = true)
public TeamDto getTeamByName(String teamName){
TeamEntity entity= teamRepository.getTeamByName(teamName);
return modelMapper.map(entity,TeamDto.class);
}
In my case I realized I did not need a bidirectional (One To Many-Many To One) relationship.
This fixed my issue:
// Team Class:
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
private Set<Player> members = new HashSet<Player>();
// Player Class - These three lines removed:
// #ManyToOne
// #JoinColumn(name = "pla_fk_n_teamId")
// private Team team;
Project Lombok might also produce this issue. Try adding #ToString and #EqualsAndHashCode if you are using Lombok.
#Data
#Entity
#EqualsAndHashCode(exclude = { "members"}) // This,
#ToString(exclude = { "members"}) // and this
public class Team implements Serializable {
// ...
This is a nice guide on infinite recursion annotations https://www.baeldung.com/jackson-bidirectional-relationships-and-infinite-recursion
You can use #JsonIgnoreProperties annotation to avoid infinite loop, like this:
#JsonIgnoreProperties("members")
private Team team;
or like this:
#JsonIgnoreProperties("team")
private List<Player> members;
or both.
I have a problem trying to map an inheritance tree. A simplified version of my model is like this:
#MappedSuperclass
#Embeddable
public class BaseEmbedded implements Serializable {
#Column(name="BE_FIELD")
private String beField;
// Getters and setters follow
}
#MappedSuperclass
#Embeddable
public class DerivedEmbedded extends BaseEmbedded {
#Column(name="DE_FIELD")
private String deField;
// Getters and setters follow
}
#MappedSuperclass
public abstract class BaseClass implements Serializable {
#Embedded
protected BaseEmbedded embedded;
public BaseClass() {
this.embedded = new BaseEmbedded();
}
// Getters and setters follow
}
#Entity
#Table(name="MYTABLE")
#Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.SINGLE_TABLE)
#DiscriminatorColumn(name="TYPE", discriminatorType=DiscriminatorType.STRING)
public class DerivedClass extends BaseClass {
#Id
#Column(name="ID", nullable=false)
private Long id;
#Column(name="TYPE", nullable=false, insertable=false, updatable=false)
private String type;
public DerivedClass() {
this.embedded = new DerivedClass();
}
// Getters and setters follow
}
#Entity
#DiscriminatorValue("A")
public class DerivedClassA extends DerivedClass {
#Embeddable
public static NestedClassA extends DerivedEmbedded {
#Column(name="FIELD_CLASS_A")
private String fieldClassA;
}
public DerivedClassA() {
this.embedded = new NestedClassA();
}
// Getters and setters follow
}
#Entity
#DiscriminatorValue("B")
public class DerivedClassB extends DerivedClass {
#Embeddable
public static NestedClassB extends DerivedEmbedded {
#Column(name="FIELD_CLASS_B")
private String fieldClassB;
}
public DerivedClassB() {
this.embedded = new NestedClassB();
}
// Getters and setters follow
}
At Java level, this model is working fine, and I believe is the appropriate one. My problem comes up when it's time to persist an object.
At runtime, I can create an object which could be an instance of DerivedClass, DerivedClassA or DerivedClassB. As you can see, each one of the derived classes introduces a new field which only makes sense for that specific derived class. All the classes share the same physical table in the database. If I persist an object of type DerivedClass, I expect fields BE_FIELD, DE_FIELD, ID and TYPE to be persisted with their values and the remaining fields to be null. If I persist an object of type DerivedClass A, I expect those same fields plus the FIELD_CLASS_A field to be persisted with their values and field FIELD_CLASS_B to be null. Something equivalent for an object of type DerivedClassB.
Since the #Embedded annotation is at the BaseClass only, Hibernate is only persisting the fields up to that level in the tree. I don't know how to tell Hibernate that I want to persist up to the appropriate level in the tree, depending on the actual type of the embedded property.
I cannot have another #Embedded property in the subclasses since this would duplicate data that is already present in the superclass and would also break the Java model.
I cannot declare the embedded property to be of a more specific type either, since it's only at runtime when the actual object is created and I don't have a single branch in the hierarchy.
Is it possible to solve my problem? Or should I resignate myself to accept that there is no way to persist the Java model as it is?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Wow. This is the simplified version? I assume that the behavior that you are seeing is that BaseEmbedded field is persisted but not the FIELD_CLASS_A or B?
The problem is that when Hibernate maps the DerivedClassA and B classes, it reflects and sees the embedded field as a BaseEmbedded class. Just because you then persist an object with the embedded field being a NestedClass, the mapping has already been done and the FIELD_CLASS_A and B are never referenced.
What you need to do is to get rid of the NestedClass* and embedded field and instead have the fieldClassA and B be normal members of DerivedClassA and B. Then add add a name field to the #Entity which will put them both in the same table I believe. This will allow you to collapse/simplify your class hierarchy a lot further.
See: http://docs.jboss.org/hibernate/stable/annotations/reference/en/html_single/#d0e1168
#Entity(name = "DerivedClass")
#DiscriminatorValue("A")
public class DerivedClassA extends DerivedClass {
#Column(name="FIELD_CLASS_A")
private String fieldClassA;
...
#Entity(name = "DerivedClass")
#DiscriminatorValue("B")
public class DerivedClassB extends DerivedClass {
#Column(name="FIELD_CLASS_B")
private String fieldClassB;
...
Suppose a Table per subclass inheritance relationship which can be described bellow (From wikibooks.org - see here)
Notice Parent class is not abstract
#Entity
#Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.JOINED)
public class Project {
#Id
private long id;
// Other properties
}
#Entity
#Table(name="LARGEPROJECT")
public class LargeProject extends Project {
private BigDecimal budget;
}
#Entity
#Table(name="SMALLPROJECT")
public class SmallProject extends Project {
}
I have a scenario where i just need to retrieve the Parent class. Because of performance issues, What should i do to run a HQL query in order to retrieve the Parent class and just the Parent class without loading any subclass ???
A workaround is described below:
Define your Parent class as MappedSuperClass. Let's suppose the parent class is mapped To PARENT_TABLE
#MappedSuperClass
public abstract class AbstractParent implements Serializable {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private long id;
#Column(table="PARENT_TABLE")
private String someProperty;
// getter's and setter's
}
For each subclass, extend the AbstractParent class and define its SecondaryTable. Any persistent field defined in the parent class will be mapped to the table defined by SecondaryTable. And finally, use AttributeOverrides if needed
#Entity
#SecondaryTable("PARENT_TABLE")
public class Child extends AbstractParent {
private String childField;
public String getChildProperty() {
return childField;
}
}
And define another Entity with the purpose of retrieving just the parent class
#Entity
#Table(name="PARENT_TABLE")
#AttributeOverrides({
#AttributeOverride(name="someProperty", column=#Column(name="someProperty"))
})
public class Parent extends AbstractParent {}
Nothing else. See as shown above i have used just JPA specific annotations
Update: It appears the first option doesn't work as I thought.
First option:
Specify the class in the where clause:
select p from Project p where p.class = Project
Second option:
Use explicit polymorphism that you can set using Hibernate's #Entity annotation:
#javax.persistence.Entity
#org.hibernate.annotations.Entity(polymorphism = PolymorphismType.EXPLICIT)
#Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.JOINED)
public class Project {
#Id
private long id;
...
}
This is what Hibernate Core documentation writes about explicit polymorphism:
Implicit polymorphism means that
instances of the class will be
returned by a query that names any
superclass or implemented interface or
class, and that instances of any
subclass of the class will be returned
by a query that names the class
itself. Explicit polymorphism means
that class instances will be returned
only by queries that explicitly name
that class.
See also
How to get only super class in table-per-subclass strategy?
Actually, there is a way to get just the superclass, you just need to use the native query from JPA, in my case I'm using JPA Repositories it would be something like that:
#Query(value = "SELECT * FROM project", nativeQuery = true)
List<Resource> findAllProject();
The flag nativeQuery as true allow running the native SQL on database.
If you are using Entity Manager check this out: https://www.thoughts-on-java.org/jpa-native-queries/
I have my domain object, Client, I've got a form on my JSP that is pre-populated with its data, I can take in amended values, and persist the object.
Client has an abstract entity called MarketResearch, which is then extended by one of three more concrete sub-classes.
I have a form to pre-populate some MarketResearch data, but when I make changes and try to persist the Client, it doesn't get saved, can someone give me some pointers on where I've gone wrong?
My 3 domain classes are as follows (removed accessors etc)
public class Client extends NamedEntity
{
#OneToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "MARKET_RESEARCH_ID")
private MarketResearch marketResearch;
...
}
#Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.JOINED)
public abstract class MarketResearch extends AbstractEntity
{
...
}
#Entity(name="MARKETRESEARCHLG")
public class MarketResearchLocalGovernment extends MarketResearch
{
#Column(name = "CURRENT_HR_SYSTEM")
private String currentHRSystem;
...
}
This is how I'm persisting
public void persistClient(Client client)
{
if (client.getId() != null)
{
getJpaTemplate().merge(client);
getJpaTemplate().flush();
} else
{
getJpaTemplate().persist(client);
}
}
To summarize, if I change something on the parent object, it persists, but if I change something on the child object it doesn't. Have I missed something blatantly obvious?
I've put a breakpoint right before the persist/merge calls, I can see the updated value on the object, but it doesn't seem to save. I've checked at database level as well, no luck
Thanks
You need to set a proper cascade option on #OneToOne in order to get your operations cascaded:
#OneToOne(cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#JoinColumn(name = "MARKET_RESEARCH_ID")
private MarketResearch marketResearch;