#Service
#Slf4j
public class ScheduleService implements CommandLineRunner, ApplicationListener<ContextClosedEvent>, DisposableBean {
#Override
public void destroy() throws Exception {
try {
System.out.println("exit");
Thread.sleep(3000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
There is no problem when closing the project in IntelliJ to run the method in the Spring Boot project.
However, if the project is built into a jar file and then executed in the cmd window and then forced to close, the method does not work.
Is there a way to execute the destroy() function even if I force quit by clicking the "X" button of cmd? If you exit normally with ctrl+c, there is no problem, but users click the "X" button in cmd.
use:
log.info("exit")
and try to find it in application.log
Related
I consume messages from spring-cloud-stream through a Consumer<MyMessage> Implementation. As part of the message handling I need to access methods that are protected with #PreAuthorize security-checks. By default the Consumer run unauthenticated so message-handling fails.
Consumer:
#Bean
public Consumer<MyMessage> exampleMessageConsumer(MyMessageConsumer consumer) {
return consumer::handleMessage;
}
Secured Method:
#PreAuthorize("hasAuthority('ROLE_ADMIN') or hasAuthority('ROLE_USER')")
public void doSomething() { ... }
I dont just want to bypass security, so what is the easiest way to authenticate my Consumer so it passes the check?
EDIT: we are using google pubsub as a binder
For the Kafka binder:
Add an #EventListener to listen for ConsumerStartedEvents; you can then add the authentication to the security context via the SecurityContextHolder; this binds it to the thread; the same thread is used to call the listener.
I found two possible solutions to my problem
use springs RunAs support (baeldung) to add permissions to a security context for a specific method. If i do this i need to add ROLE_RUN_AS_USER to my secured methods. At scale this would complicated annotations a lot.
Manually change the security context before executing the handler method and return it to its original state afterwards.
I went with the second option. I would have liked a transparent solution but there does not appear to be one.
To make this work i created a class that wraps a functional interface with the changing code and returns it.
public class RunAs {
#FunctionalInterface
public interface RunAsMethod {
void runWithException() throws Throwable;
}
public static <T> Consumer<T> createWriteConsumer(Consumer<T> originalConsumer) {
return message -> runWithWritePermission(() -> originalConsumer.accept(message));
}
public static void runWithWritePermission(final RunAsMethod func) {
final Authentication originalAuthentication = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication();
final AnonymousAuthenticationToken token = new AnonymousAuthenticationToken(
"system",
originalAuthentication != null ? originalAuthentication.getPrincipal() : "system",
AuthorityUtils.createAuthorityList("ROLE_ADMIN", "SCOPE_write")
);
SecurityContextHolder.getContext().setAuthentication(token);
try {
func.runWithException();
} catch (Throwable e) {
throw new RuntimeException("exception during method with altered permissions", e);
} finally {
SecurityContextHolder.getContext().setAuthentication(originalAuthentication);
}
}
}
I have to run a few methods when Application starts, like the following:
#SpringBootApplication
public class Application implements CommandLineRunner {
private final MonitoringService monitoringService;
private final QrReaderServer qrReaderServer;
#Override
public void run(String... args) {
monitoringService.launchMonitoring();
qrReaderServer.launchServer();
}
However, only the first one is executed! And the application is started:
... Started Application in 5.21 seconds (JVM running for 6.336)
... START_MONITORING for folder: D:\results
The second one is always skipped!
If change the call order - the only the second one will be executed.
Could not find any solution for launching both at the beginning - tried #PostConstruct, ApplicationRunner, #EventListener(ApplicationReadyEvent.class)...
Looks like they are blocking each other somehow. Despite the fact that both have void type.
Monitoring launch implementation:
#Override
public void launchMonitoring() {
log.info("START_MONITORING for folder: {}", monitoringProperties.getFolder());
try {
WatchKey key;
while ((key = watchService.take()) != null) {
for (WatchEvent<?> event : key.pollEvents()) {
WatchEvent.Kind<?> kind = event.kind();
if (kind == ENTRY_CREATE) {
log.info("FILE_CREATED: {}", event.context());
// some delay for fully file upload
Thread.sleep(monitoringProperties.getFrequency());
String fullFileName = getFileName(event);
String fileName = FilenameUtils.removeExtension(fullFileName);
processResource(fullFileName, fileName);
}
}
key.reset();
}
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
log.error("interrupted exception for monitoring service", e);
} catch (IOException e) {
log.error("io exception while processing file", e);
}
}
QR Reader start (launch TCP server with Netty configuration):
#Override
public void launchServer() {
try {
ChannelFuture serverChannelFuture = serverBootstrap.bind(hostAddress).sync();
log.info("Server is STARTED : port {}", hostAddress.getPort());
serverChannel = serverChannelFuture.channel().closeFuture().sync().channel();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
} finally {
shutdownQuietly();
}
}
How to solve this issue?
Start launchMonitoring() asynchronously.
The easiest way to do this is to enable Async by adding #EnableAsync on your Application
and then annotate launchMonitoring() with #Async
Not sure if launchServer() should also be started asynchronously.
EDIT: completed Answer
No task executor bean found for async processing: no bean of type TaskExecutor and no bean named 'taskExecutor' either
By default Spring will create a SimpleAsyncTaskExecutor, but you can provide your taskExecutor
Example:
#EnableAsync
#Configuration
public class AsyncConfig implements AsyncConfigurer {
#Override
public Executor getAsyncExecutor() {
ThreadPoolTaskExecutor executor = new ThreadPoolTaskExecutor();
executor.set... // your custom configs
executor.initialize();
return executor;
}
...
}
I try save list of entities to Oracle Db.
#Transactional
public void save() {
//logick
for (QuittanceType quittanceType : quittance) {
quittancesService.parseQuittance(quittanceType);
}
//logick
}
On each step I call this method:
#Transactional
#Override
public void parseQuittance(QuittanceType quittance) {
try {
//logick create payToChargeDb
paymentToChargeService.saveAndFlush(payToChargeDb);
} catch (Exception e) {
log.warn("Ignore.", e);
}
}
and method
#Override
public PaymentsToCharge saveAndFlushIn(PaymentsToCharge paymentsToCharge) {
return paymentToChargeRepository.saveAndFlush(paymentsToCharge);
}
When I try save entity with constraint My main transaction rollback and I get stacktrace:
Caused by: java.sql.BatchUpdateException: ORA-02290: CHECK integrity constraint violated(MYDB.PAYMENTS_TO_CHARGE_CHK1)
But I want skip not success entities and save success. I marck my method
#Transactional(propagation = Propagation.REQUIRES_NEW)
and it look like this:
#Transactional
#Override
public void parseQuittance(QuittanceType quittance) {
try {
//logick create payToChargeDb
paymentToChargeService.saveAndFlushInNewTransaction(payToChargeDb);
} catch (Exception e) {
log.warn("Ignore.", e);
}
}
and
#Transactional(propagation = Propagation.REQUIRES_NEW)
#Override
public PaymentsToCharge saveAndFlushInNewTransaction(PaymentsToCharge paymentsToCharge) {
return paymentToChargeRepository.saveAndFlush(paymentsToCharge);
}
But when I try save entity with constraint I not get exception and not enter to catcj block. just stop working debugging and the application continues to work. I do not get any errors. and as if rollback is happening
The proxy created by #Transactional does not intercept calls within the object.
In proxy mode (which is the default), only external method calls
coming in through the proxy are intercepted. This means that
self-invocation (in effect, a method within the target object calling
another method of the target object) does not lead to an actual
transaction at runtime even if the invoked method is marked with
#Transactional. Also, the proxy must be fully initialized to provide
the expected behavior, so you should not rely on this feature in your
initialization code (that is, #PostConstruct).
https://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/spring-framework-reference/data-access.html#transaction-declarative
The same documentation recommends use of AspectJ if you want this behaviour.
I am developing and application whithin eclipse rcp framework (3.0). I would like to create an Eclipse RCP command inside of the run menu that sends shell commands to windows cmd prompt.
How can I trigger it with an event?
public class RunCmd extends AbstractHandler {
#Override
public Object execute(ExecutionEvent event) throws ExecutionException {
// I need to get runtime exec
}
}
Sample code for executing Windows Command prompt.
There are different methods available for checking process executed properly
public class SampleHandler extends AbstractHandler {
public static final String ID = "com.example.views.play";
#Override
public Object execute(ExecutionEvent event) throws ExecutionException {
String command = "adb shell input key 26";
try
{
Process process = Runtime.getRuntime().exec(command);
} catch (IOException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
return null;
}
}
my problem is: this design is working fine for one ball but i m unable to get it work for multiple balls, i have basically problem in replacing the "this" keyword in updateClients ().
i thought i need to do something like this but i m failed:
System.out.println("in ballimpl" + j.size());
for (ICallback aClient : j) {
aClient.updateClients(BallImpl[i]);
}
The current situation of code is :
The model remote object, which is iterating client list and calling update method of them,
public class BallImpl extends UnicastRemoteObject implements Ball,Runnable {
private List<ICallback> clients = new ArrayList<ICallback>();
protected static ServerServices chatServer;
static ServerServices si;
BallImpl() throws RemoteException {
super();
}
....
public synchronized void move() throws RemoteException {
loc.translate((int) changeInX, (int) changeInY);
}
public void start() throws RemoteException {
if (gameThread.isAlive()==false )
if (run==false){
gameThread.start();
}
}
/** Start the ball bouncing. */
// Run the game logic in its own thread.
public void run() {
while (true) {
run=true;
// Execute one game step
try {
updateClients();
} catch (RemoteException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
try {
Thread.sleep(50);
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
}
}
}
public void updateClients() throws RemoteException {
si = new ServerServicesImpl();
List<ICallback> j = si.getClientNames();
System.out.println("in messimpl " + j.size());
if (j != null) {
System.out.println("in ballimpl" + j.size());
for (ICallback aClient : j) {
aClient.updateClients(this);
}
} else
System.err.println("Clientlist is empty");
}
}
The client which is implementing callback interface and has update method implementation :
public final class thenewBallWhatIwant implements Runnable, ICallback {
.....
#Override
public void updateClients(final Ball ball) throws RemoteException {
try {
ball.move();
try {
Thread.sleep(50);
} catch (Exception e) {
System.exit(0);
}
} catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("Exception: " + e);
}
}
.....
}
thanks for any feedback.
jibbylala
Separate your RMI logic from your Ball logic.
You should be able to run your ball simulation without needing any RMI modules. Just to run it locally, to test it. Then you should find a way to wrap that process in RMI so that you can still run it locally to test it without any sort of RMI interface. This block of code is the engine, and it is very important to be able to test it in as atomic a form as possible. Having extra parts integrated with it just increases the complexity of what will undoubtedly be some of the most complex code.
Don't let any extra interfaces into your engine. It should be very specific and few the packages required to use your engine. Any new functionality your software needs, implement it appropriately in the engine to support generic design. Wrap that to provide specific functionality outside the core of the engine. This protects the engine design against changes to the environment. It also allows for more complete testing of the engine.
We make exceptions sometimes in cases where something will only ever be used in one way. But in this case, testing without RMI would seem to be critical to getting your engine working correctly. If your engine runs faster than the network can keep up due to large numbers of clients connecting, do you want the whole game to slow down, or do you want the clients to lag behind? I say, you want to be able to make that choice.