This is more of an edge case question but I am thinking about where one might use Lombok #Synchronized within a spring boot application.
It feels to me like there are more than enough tools in Spring Boot to cover synchronization type issues like springs DispatcherServlet and RequestMappingHandlerMapping and the Service layer by marking the class with #Transactional.
Can anyone think of a valid scenario where #Synchronized could be applied?
Related
Here, several questions have been asked by many developers about difference between Spring-Rest and JAX-RS.
And, I have also learned that Spring is not following any specification and Spring framework has their own implementation then
Why Spring allows all that Annotations which are supported/used by JAX-RS by default?
Spring does not support JAX-RS annotations. If there is a situation where you think they do, then you are mistaken or it's just a coincidence. Period. If you will add any JAX-RS annotations in my Spring MVC program, nothing will happen. Annotations are just metadata. They are not programs. If Spring does not recognize the metadata, it will ignore it. But if you use a JAX-RS annotation in place of a Spring annotation that is used for the same purpose, respective of their framework, then you will not get the expected Spring behavior. So basically, if you are using Spring MVC, remove any JAX-RS dependencies so you don't mistakenly use them.
I'm writing a Spring Boot Web Services application, thus I'm using #Endpoint and #PayloadRoot annotations.
For documentation purposes I'm using Enunciate, which doesn't support Spring-WS annotatinos at the time of writing.
Would it do any harm if I add the javax.jws.WebService to an already #Endpoint-annotated class too? Should I use only one of them?
As long as you don't have a JAX-WS implementation like CXF in your classpath and configured the WebService annotation will not be considered.
In my spring boot application spring #Transactional annotation works without specifying #EnableTransactionManagement explicitly.
Is there any official documentation saying that it is enabled automatically?
Or there is something else happening .... ?
btw: I'm using Spring Data JPA
Yes, this is enabled as long as you have spring-tx and some transactional resource in your application. Effectively if you are using spring-boot-starter-jdbc or spring-boot-starter-data-jpa, Spring Boot will configure a DataSource for you, start Hibernate (in the latter case) and configure transaction management.
Not all "Enable" annotations require to be explicitly set. When there is a reasonable amount of things that we can check to validate it makes sense to configure that for you, we'll do it. In this case, if you have a DataSource you must probably want to have transactions. If you have JPA (and no JTA infrastructure), you probably want a JpaTransactionManager). If we auto-configure that, the easiest way to use it is via #Transactional so we'll enable that in that case as well.
I guess you kept asking to get some sort of "official" answer, so here's one.
#SpringBootApplication adds #EnableAutoConfiguration it detects Spring Data JPA on your classpath. According to it Spring registers PlatformTransactionManager - JpaTransactionManager, datasource, entitymanager, repositories.
Not sure there are precise articles, but there are proper answer on stack. An official spring sample article
#Transactional annotation can work fine if the "< tx:annotation-driven/ >" tag is in your Spring XML configuration. Look at this reference : http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/transaction/annotation/EnableTransactionManagement.html
I'm gradually introducing Spring Boot to a Spring JPA project. My intent was to first introduce Spring Boot, than at some later stage Spring Data, but I was not able to find any examples (nor a suitable starter) that uses Spring Boot + JPA without Spring Data.
How come? Is there any benefit of introducing Spring Boot to Spring JPA project, without Spring Data, or does it make sense only with Spring Data in place.
Any article link or example code would be helpfull and appreciated, thanks
More context
I'm working with a live project so every change introduces risk. We're discussing of moving from XML to JAVA based configuration, and I'm advocating adopting Spring Boot at a same time, but I lack persuasive selling points.
Personally, I want to include Spring Boot on all layers to boost future productivity, but I need to argue better the direct immediate benefits of using it in our Service/DAO module which is at the moment based on Spring/JPA/Hibernate with the good old manual CRUD implementations.
So I need selling points for using Spring Boot on a persistence layer, but ones that span beyond Spring Data (e.g. configuration gains, maintenance, testing...anything)
As folks have said above, there is no Spring Boot JPA. It's either Spring Boot Data JPA, or JPA on its own.
The immediate benefits that I could think of:
With Spring Data JPA you don't write the Dao layer. For all CRUD operations, the CrudRepository interface gives you all you need. When that is not enough, all you have to use is the #Query annotation to fine-tune your SQLs
Configuration by convention. For example, with Spring Boot, just having the H2 dependency in the classpath gets Spring to use the H2 in-memory database, gives you Datasource configuration and transaction management (only at the JPA repository level) by default
Ability to create micro-services. With Spring Boot, you can create micro services that can be deployed and run on a number of boxes with java -jar ...
You can enable annotation-based transaction with one simple annotation: #EnableTransactionManagement
Java configuration over XML. This advantage is not to be underestimated
A lot less code (the DAO layer) means also a lot less maintenance
The native ability to provide a RESTful API around data: https://spring.io/guides/gs/accessing-data-rest/
It all depends where your company is heading for. If they want to deliver business value faster and move towards more a DevOps operating model, then the above advantages should be enough selling points for any organisation
Spring wiht JPA (for example Hibernate) but without Spring-Data-Jpa means that you direct interact with the JPA Entity manager and. Typical you use it to implement your own DAO from it and use the #Respository annotation.
#Respository
public class UserDao {
#PersistenceContext EntityManager em;
public User findUserByLogin(Sting login) {
....
}
}
Even if there is no starter project, you could use a Spring-Data-JPA project, and implement the Repository in this old fashion style. (And then you could show how simple it become when you just write Spring-Data-JPA interfaces)
As far as I known, spring-boot means more convenient not any independent business feature.
In other words, spring-boot helps you to start, configure your application in some automatically way. But you can do that without spring-boot with your own specific configuration.
So, you are going to use spring-boot in your application means you are going to use spring-boot's auto configuration feature with your original application.
Actually, Spring JPA implemented in spring-data-jpa is what you are looking for not spring-boot. Of course, spring-boot can simplify your work dramatically.
In spring boot's BasicBatchConfigurer there is a warning presented:
logger.warn("JPA does not support custom isolation levels, so locks may not be taken when launching Jobs");
However, I get the impression that this issue has been addressed: https://jira.spring.io/browse/SPR-11942
Is there a work around for this issue? Should I just be extending BatchConfigurer and implementing my own createJobRepository method? Should there be a change to spring boot code?