Develop Reference

Field mapping with MapStruct by JsonProperty annotation

In my current project the names of the model class fields are German. The fields are all annotated with #JsonProperty for the English translation of the names. E.g. #JsonProperty(value = "operation"). Is there a way in the configuration that the mapping of the fields is done using the JsonProperty annotation?
Example:
public class Auftrag {
#JsonProperty(value = "orderType")
private String auftragsart;
...
}
public class OrderDto {
private String orderType;
}

MapStruct uses the Java Bean convention to detect the properties. This means that it looks in the getters and setters.
Out-of-the-box you cannot use the #JsonProperty. However, you can create your own AccessorNamingStrategy that will provide the properties based on #JsonProperty. The AccessorNamingStrategy gives you access to the Abstract syntax tree, which means you can look for fields in types, check their annotations and check their values.
Keep in mind that MapStruct will only ask to get the property for a method, so you would need to get the property name, then find the field in the type, then look for the #JsonProperty annotation and its value.
You can read more about the AccessorNamingStrategy here in the documentation.

#Transient not working in hibernate

I am using hibernate 4.1.9.
My code is
#Transient
private String ldapIdTemp;
package is
import javax.persistence.Transient;
Still in hibernate query, it is not working and putting the attribute in the query.
part of query snippet (assetasset0_.ldapIdTemp as ldapIdTemp16_0_, )
I am not sure what I am doing wrong.

Can you try creating setter and getter for the field and annotate the get method with #Transient, as follows:
private String ldapIdTemp;
#Transient
public String getLdapIdTemp() {
return ldapIdTemp;
}
public void setLdapIdTemp(String ldapIdTemp) {
this.ldapIdTemp = ldapIdTemp;
}

Much depends on how you "integrated" this field in your Entity or class hierarchy. Moreover, field vs. property-access could cause an issue for your setting. See this post for a detailed explanation.
In your case, I could imagine that you either:
mixed field and property-access in your entity inheritance strategy
use XML-based configuration for Hibernate in your application.
In both cases the JPA 2.0/2.1 specification clearly states in Section 2.3.1:
It is an error if a default access type cannot be determined and an access type is not explicitly specified
by means of annotations or the XML descriptor. The behavior of applications that mix the placement of
annotations on fields and properties within an entity hierarchy without explicitly specifying the
Access annotation is undefined.
Please check that your persistent Entity classes have either field OR property-based annotations.

Check the #Transient annotation fully qualified name.
It can be from either,
org.springframework.data.annotation.Transient or javax.persistence.Transient.
Try to use javax.persistence.Transient.

Make a field transient for serialization, but non-transient for JPA

Question:
Is it possible to have a field persisted by JPA but skipped by serialization?
It is possible to achive the opposite (JPA skips a field and serialization doesn't), and if this feature is used, surely the reverse would be useful.
Something like this:
#Entity
class MyClass {
// Other fields.
#NonTransient
private transient String strangeField;
}
I am asking mostly out of curiosity, so I don't have a specific context.

One option is to use property access on the entity. Then, mark the field as transient. JPA will ignore the field and only use the getter. Thus, serialization skips the field, and JPA uses the getter.
#Entity(AccessType.Property)
class MyClass {
// Other fields.
private transient String strangeField;
public String getStrangeField() {
return strangeField;
}
public void setStrangeField(String strangeField) {
this.strangeField = strangeField;
}
}

You need to use property access, or use XML to map the entity instead of annotations.

Can't I use #Value annotation with #Transient annotation?

I have a class to map a table for using hibernate. There are some variable I want to ignore for mapping to use as constant. And I want to load constant value from properties so I code it like this:
#Transient
#Value("${something.value}")
private int MY_VALUE;
But, the value of MY_VALUE is always set to 0. Can't I use #Transient annotation with #Value annotation? Or I missed something else?

Those two annotations belong in different domains.
#Transient belongs to an entity, while #Value belongs to Spring Beans. Entities are managed by JPA / Hibernate, Spring Beans are managed by Spring. It is not a good idea to mix the two.
You could achieve this by using the #Configurable annotation and AspectJ compilation or Load Time Weaving, but I would strongly advise against such a hack. Use a Spring Bean to hold a #Value, not an entity!

You use #Value to specify a property value to load when Spring creates the bean.
However, if you are using Hibernate to load data from a database, Spring is not instantiating these classes for you. So your #Value annotation has no effect.
I would suggest injecting the #Value into the DAO that loads these entities from Hibernate, something like
public class FooDao {
#Value("...")
private int yourConfiguredValue;
public getFoo() {
Foo foo = sessionFactory.getCurrentSession().get(...);
foo.setYourValue(yourConfiguredValue);
return foo;
}
}

In my scenario I have a class Employee which has relation with class Organization.
I don't want to serialize a whole dependent object(Organization), rather serialize a single parameter of organization(e.g. orgID).
I tried following:
#Transient
#value("#{target.orgId.id}")
private UUID org_Id;
but it didnt work. So i used a simple getter mehtod instead of a field variable as follows:
#JsonIgnore
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, optional = false)
#JoinColumn(name = "orgID")
private Organization orgId;
#JsonProperty("orgId")
public UUID getOrg_ID() {
return orgId.getId();
}
it worked and i got simple orgId field in response serialized by Jackson.
It seems Jackson work with getters without considering a field variable is declared or not corresponding to that getter method.

Strange JPA behaviour, initialized field is null

I'm observing a very strange behaviour with an entity class and loading an object of this class whith JPA (hibernate entitymanager 3.3.1.ga). The Class has a (embedded) field, that is initialized in the declaration. The setter of the field implements a null check (i.e. would throw an exception when a null value is set).
...
#Entity
public class Participant extends BaseEntity implements Comparable<Participant> {
...
#Embedded
private AmsData amsData = new AmsData();
public void setAmsData(AmsData amsData) {
Checks.verifyArgNotNull(amsData, "amsdata");
this.amsData = amsData;
}
...
}
When I get this object with JPA, the field is null, if there is no data in the db for the fields specified in the embedded object.
...
public class ParticipantJpaDao implements ParticipantDao {
#PersistenceContext
private EntityManager em;
#Override
public Participant getParticipant(Long id) {
return em.find(Participant.class, id);
}
...
}
I debugged the process with a watchpoint on the field (should halt when the field is accessed or modified), and I see one modification when the field is initialized, but when I get the result from the find call, the field is null.
Can anybody explain, why this is so? How can I ensure, that the field is not null, also when there is no data for the embedded object's fields in the db (besides from setting it manually after the find call).

The JPA specification doesn't explicitly say how to handle a set of columns representing an embeddable object which are all empty. It could signal a null reference, or an object instance with all null fields. Hibernate chooses a null reference in this case, though other JPA implementations may pick the later.
The reason why your setter is never called is because Hibernate is accessing your field via reflection, bypassing the setter you implemented. It's doing this because you utilize field-based access rather than property-based access.
Chad's answer would provide the functionality you're looking for, but there is a caveat (see below).
"...The persistent state of an entity
is accessed by the persistence
provider runtime[1] either via
JavaBeans style property accessors or
via instance variables. A single
access type (field or property access)
applies to an entity hierarchy. When
annotations are used, the placement of
the mapping annotations on either the
persistent fields or persistent
properties of the entity class
specifies the access type as being
either field- or property-based access
respectively..." [ejb3 persistence
spec]
so by moving the annotations down to the setter, you are telling JPA that you want to used property-based access instead of field-based access. You should know, however, that field-based access - as you currently implement it - is preferred over property-based access. There are a couple reasons why property-based access is discouraged, but one is that they you're forced to add getters and setters for all of your persistent entity fields, but you may not want those same fields susceptible to mutation by external clients. In other words, using JPA's property-based access forces you to weaken your entity's encapsulation.

The answer is (thanks to rcampell), if all data of an embedded object is null (in the db), the embedded object will also be null, although when it is initialized in the declaration. The only solution seems to be, setting the object manually.
#Override
public Participant getParticipant(Long id) {
Participant participant = em.find(Participant.class, id);
if(participant != null && participant.getAmsData() == null)
{
participant.setAmsData(new AmsData());
}
return participant;
}
Still feels strange to me ...

Well, it's possible that your object could be getting constructed twice behind the scenes. JPA implementations will usually set those fields directly.
I think you need to put the annotations on the Getters and setters themselves if you want them to be used. See this answer:
Empty constructors and setters on JPA Entites

It's 2018 now and I had the same problem in a similiar situation.
Using your code as example, I solved the problem like this:
#Entity
public class Participant extends BaseEntity implements Comparable<Participant> {
...
#Embedded
private AmsData amsData = new AmsData();
public void getAmsData(AmsData amsData) {
Checks.verifyArgNotNull(amsData, "amsdata");
this.amsData = amsData;
}
public AmsData getAmsData(){
if(amsData == null){
amsData = new AmsData();
}
return amsData;
}
...
}

I was having the same problem , I just added getters and setters using #Getter and #setter lombok annotations and it started working