How can I create a proxy for a service in HK2 - java

I am using Jersey 2.x and HK2 which is built-in into Jersey.
I need to decorate certain methods in my services marked by annotation, i.e. I'd like to perform some additional actions before and after such methods calls. Unfortunately, HK2 doesn't have any AOP capabilities. I thought that I could bind my factory to a service's interface and create a proxy of the service whenever factory's provide method is called. However, I need a couple of things to my factory to work:
1) the service's class and interface to create a proxy
2) ServiceLocator instance to properly inject all service's dependencies
And I just don't see any way to have both. If I bind factory using bindFactory(MyFactory.class) then I can't pass information about the service into it, but can have ServiceLocator instance injected into it. And if I bind factory using bindFactory(new MyFactory(Service.class, ServiceImpl.class)) then I have information about the service, but I don't have ServiceLocator instance to properly create that service, because HK2 doesn't inject anything into factories instances and I don't see anyway to get a ServiceLocator instance from AbstractBinder to provide my factory with locator during binding.
I would really appreciate any suggestions and recommendations. I hope I am not the first one who wants to uniformly proxy my services.

In the most recent version of hk2 (2.2.0-b25) we have added the ability to add AOP alliance interceptors to any method. But this feature is not yet fully baked (we will be adding constructor injection) and not yet fully documented. But you might want to start playing around with it, as it will give you the ability to add AOP MethodInterceptors to any method on your service.

Related

Spring beans used in two different scopes

We have a Web Application exposing both Web Resources (REST) and JMS MessageListener. Spring is the framework used to define and inject beans.
We defined beans in the scope "request" to store information usable for Web Resources. We would like to use those beans also in the JMS MessageListener, but the "request" scope does not exist and cause an exception.
One solution of this problem is to use a custom scope of type "thread" as implemented with the "SimpleThreadScope" of Spring. But the destruction of the beans is not implemented in this class. I know there is a way to implement this with the "Spring custom scope thread by example", but I prefer letting the Application Server manage the thread pool.
Do you have any other idea/suggestion about this issue?
Important aspect: the beans created in the scope are used as by resources as well as by JMS Message Listener.
Let's take an example.
Imagine we have the following classes:
Class BeanInScope1
Class WebResource1
Class Service1
Class MessageListener1
The "Service1" uses the "BeanInScope1", and the "Service1" can be called either by "WebResource1" or by "MessageListener1", meaning that the "BeanInScope1" msut be created in the same way by "WebResource1" and "MessageListener1".
Hope this example shall help...

How create custome spring scope which provide beans similar to session scope?

It is needed to define Spring scope which will provide a proxy to the beans and reload/recreate target beans when say an event occurs. The behavior is similar to session beans, except there is no http session.
Does Spring provide a way for such bean proxing and scope manipulation?
UPDATED
Say that it is need to change externalUrl which is used to send http requests. So the application has to switch to new bean with new http connection pool created.
When bean autowired directly it is imposible to recreate it, especially when it is used in many places. So I search some way to inject a proxy instead of it and recreate target instace without altering caller code.
It is possible. I can't tell you exactly how to do it, but if you're able to, something like Spring Cloud Config would be exactly what you want. If you can't adopt that, I would start digging into the source code. The class you'd want to start with is the RefreshScope - from there, you should be able to figure out how it works and how it re-creates beans. I'm sorry that I can't provide more direction.

CDI choosing correct scope for bean

Coming from plain old DI of Spring I can't figure out how to choose scopes properly while writing with CDI.
In Spring all my services have singleton scope by default, which I suppose maps to application scope in CDI (or even #Singleton). I know for e.g. logged in user information I need to use Session scope and for e.g. form params I need request scope.
Say I have a bean that hides external service API calls. It is completely stateless. Should I put it as #Singleton or simply application scoped? Or let it be created on every request (possibly bad option).
Is this correct to inject everything everywhere? In Spring I create my data objects by new. Should I do the same in CDI or simply #Inject them?
Are you only using CDI? or a Java EE 6 container? If you have a stateless class that is used for service calls, then I would recommend using #Stateless, which is from the EJB spec (so you would need a Java EE 6 container) It isn't a singleton, but it doesn't get created on each request either. I believe it is more closely bound to the session, but since it is stateless, instances can be pooled and shared. If you are only dealing with CDI, I believe Singleton matches more directly to Spring's singleton, but I would recommend using ApplicationScoped because it provides a proxy which makes serialization of beans that use it easier.
#Service
#Scope("prototype")
public class CustomerService
{
......
}
Just add #Scope("prototype") annotation to your component.
Is there a reason you would need the bean to remember it's state? If you are using something like a web client, that is a better place to store state in say, session scoped managed beans (assuming jsf), or whatever equivalent for your case. On the back end server side your EJB's would be better kept as #stateless to keep overhead to a minimum and help with the 'keep it simple s..." paradigm. And in case this works, just declare #Stateless on your bean. Unless there is a reason to use a singleton, again it is better to use a stateless bean if you want to go with a Java EE container for your services.
Stateless beans are not really being recreated with every request. That is the purpose of the pool. The app server keeps a ready supply of stateless beans on hand, and if it gets busy, it will make more, and if it quiets down, it will empty some out.

should a Service layer be a Spring bean?

Can or should a Service layer be a Spring bean?
If so, how should it be got from a calling application, a consumer of a service?
Because the consumer must be aware that such a bean exists, so it in any case must use Spring
to make use of Service methods.
Of course. The service layer is the part of your application that is visible to other users (e.g. a Web layer) so it needs to be configured and setup somewhere. Imho a Spring configuration is the best place to put this configuration in. The Service Layer user then has to take care of instantiating that context and getting the Service Objects he needs.
An alternative - if it needs to run standalone - would be for your service class(es) implementing the Service Layer interface(s) to instantiate the Spring application context themselves.
By making your consumers also spring beans, and inject the service bean with dependency injection.
Yes, It is always nice to configure service beans as spring beans. In the web layer you need to take care of instantiating the needed service objects. Another option is to make the web layer classes also as spring beans and inject the necessary service layer spring beans. From the testing point of view also, this type of design is very helpful when we use Spring testing framework.

Spring 2.5 managed servlets: howto?

Correct me if anything is wrong.
As I understand, all Spring functionality, namely DI works when beans are got thru
Spring Context, ie getBean() method.
Otherwise, none can work, even if my method is marked #Transactional and I will
create the owning class with a new operator, no transaction management will be provided.
I use Tomcat 6 as a servlet container.
So, my question is: how to make Servlet methods managed by Spring framework.
The issue here is that I use a framework, and its servlets extend the functionality of
basic java Servlets, so they have more methods. Still, web.xml is present in an app as usual.
The thing is that I do not control the servlets creation flow, I can only override a few methods
of each servlet, the flow is basically written down in some xml file, but I control this process
using a graphical gui.
So, basically, I only add some code to a few methods of each Servlet.
How to make those methods managed by Spring framework? The basic thing I need to do is
making these methods transactional (#Transactional).
comment to Bozho:
#Bozho Let's see. In these servlets' methods I work with framework capabilities, let's say special variables that are got and saved in the current session. And what is needed, is looping through those framework-based collections while saving some values in a database. What you suggest is introducing a new very complex object, so that it could be passed to a service layer. (Service layer will not know anything about framework, its classes and objects kept in current Session! First, we "wrap" framework based collections to such a object, so copy everything into it. Then, again, the Service layer method should either save changes in a database or, worse case, return a new complex object so that Servlet framework method could update framework variables depending on the result of Service layer method execution. It is a workaround but do you think it is a good idea?
You can also define your servlets directly in the Spring application context. You'll need a "proxy" servlet registered in web.xml and delegating to the servlet instance which is configured as bean in the applicationContext.xml. Proxy servlet is configured with the name of the target servlet bean, it discovers this bean via WebApplicationContextUtils.getRequiredWebApplicationContext().getBean(...) and delegates all the processing to the target servlet. In this case an instance of your servlet is completely managed by Spring.
I'd suggest restructuring your code - making servlet methods transactional is not a good thing to do. Put the transactional logic in a separate, service class, and either
obtain these spring-managed classes by WebApplicationContextUtils.getRequiredWebApplicationContext().getBean(..) or
in your servlet init() method obtain the ApplicationContext with the above method and call appCtx.getAutowireCapableBeanFactory().autowireBean(this). This way you can inject the transactional classes in your servlet as if it was spring-managed.
Now, you can do all this, but it is definitely not a beautiful way to go. I'd suggest using Spring MVC or any other MVC framework (which support spring integration of its components)
If this is all not possible, as a last resort I think you can use #Configurable (on your servlets) with a <context:load-time-weaver/>.
You should take a look how Spring proxy filters:
http://grepcode.com/file/repository.springsource.com/org.springframework/org.springframework.web/3.0.2/org/springframework/web/filter/DelegatingFilterProxy.java
In theory you could easily make the same sort of proxy for servlets and DispatcherServlet is sort of a proxy.

Categories

Resources