In Spring batch I need to pass the items read by an ItemReader to two different processors and writer. What I'm trying to achieve is that...
+---> ItemProcessor#1 ---> ItemWriter#1
|
ItemReader ---> item ---+
|
+---> ItemProcessor#2 ---> ItemWriter#2
This is needed because items written by ItemWriter#1 should be processed in a completely different way compared to the ones written by ItemWriter#2.
Moreover, ItemReader reads item from a database, and the queries it executes are so computational expensive that executing the same query twice should be discarded.
Any hint about how to achieve such set up ? Or, at least, a logically equivalent set up ?
This solution is valid if your item should be processed by processor #1 and processor #2
You have to create a processor #0 with this signature:
class Processor0<Item, CompositeResultBean>
where CompositeResultBean is a bean defined as
class CompositeResultBean {
Processor1ResultBean result1;
Processor2ResultBean result2;
}
In your Processor #0 just delegate work to processors #1 and #2 and put result in CompositeResultBean
CompositeResultBean Processor0.process(Item item) {
final CompositeResultBean r = new CompositeResultBean();
r.setResult1(processor1.process(item));
r.setResult2(processor2.process(item));
return r;
}
Your own writer is a CompositeItemWriter that delegate to writer CompositeResultBean.result1 or CompositeResultBean.result2 (look at PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter, maybe can help)
I followed Luca's suggestion to use PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter as writer and I was able to work with two different entities in one single step.
First of all what I did was to define a DTO that stores the two entities/results from the processor
public class DatabaseEntry {
private AccessLogEntry accessLogEntry;
private BlockedIp blockedIp;
public AccessLogEntry getAccessLogEntry() {
return accessLogEntry;
}
public void setAccessLogEntry(AccessLogEntry accessLogEntry) {
this.accessLogEntry = accessLogEntry;
}
public BlockedIp getBlockedIp() {
return blockedIp;
}
public void setBlockedIp(BlockedIp blockedIp) {
this.blockedIp = blockedIp;
}
}
Then I passed this DTO to the writer, a PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter class where I define two customized methods to write the entities into the database, see my writer code below:
#Configuration
public class LogWriter extends LogAbstract {
#Autowired
private DataSource dataSource;
#Bean()
public PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter<DatabaseEntry> itemWriterAccessLogEntry() {
PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter<DatabaseEntry> propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter = new PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter<DatabaseEntry>();
propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter.setFieldsUsedAsTargetMethodArguments(new String[]{"accessLogEntry", "blockedIp"});
propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter.setTargetObject(this);
propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter.setTargetMethod("saveTransaction");
return propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter;
}
public void saveTransaction(AccessLogEntry accessLogEntry, BlockedIp blockedIp) throws SQLException {
writeAccessLogTable(accessLogEntry);
if (blockedIp != null) {
writeBlockedIp(blockedIp);
}
}
private void writeBlockedIp(BlockedIp entry) throws SQLException {
PreparedStatement statement = dataSource.getConnection().prepareStatement("INSERT INTO blocked_ips (ip,threshold,startDate,endDate,comment) VALUES (?,?,?,?,?)");
statement.setString(1, entry.getIp());
statement.setInt(2, threshold);
statement.setTimestamp(3, Timestamp.valueOf(startDate));
statement.setTimestamp(4, Timestamp.valueOf(endDate));
statement.setString(5, entry.getComment());
statement.execute();
}
private void writeAccessLogTable(AccessLogEntry entry) throws SQLException {
PreparedStatement statement = dataSource.getConnection().prepareStatement("INSERT INTO log_entries (date,ip,request,status,userAgent) VALUES (?,?,?,?,?)");
statement.setTimestamp(1, Timestamp.valueOf(entry.getDate()));
statement.setString(2, entry.getIp());
statement.setString(3, entry.getRequest());
statement.setString(4, entry.getStatus());
statement.setString(5, entry.getUserAgent());
statement.execute();
}
}
With this approach you can get the wanted inital behaviour from a single reader for processing multiple entities and save them in a single step.
You can use a CompositeItemProcessor and CompositeItemWriter
It won't look exactly like your schema, it will be sequential, but it will do the job.
this is the solution I came up with.
So, the idea is to code a new Writer that "contains" both an ItemProcessor and an ItemWriter. Just to give you an idea, we called it PreprocessoWriter, and that's the core code.
private ItemWriter<O> writer;
private ItemProcessor<I, O> processor;
#Override
public void write(List<? extends I> items) throws Exception {
List<O> toWrite = new ArrayList<O>();
for (I item : items) {
toWrite.add(processor.process(item));
}
writer.write(toWrite);
}
There's a lot of things being left aside. Management of ItemStream, for instance. But in our particular scenario this was enough.
So you can just combine multiple PreprocessorWriter with CompositeWriter.
There is an other solution if you have a reasonable amount of items (like less than 1 Go) : you can cache the result of your select into a collection wrapped in a Spring bean.
Then u can just read the collection twice with no cost.
Related
In my Spring boot and Spring batch application, I have a step like this:
#Bean
public Step step1() {
return stepBuilderFactory.get("step1").<FileInfo, FileInfo>chunk(10).reader(FileInfoItemReader).processor(processor()).writer(writer()).build();
}
My writer is a empty like below:
public class BlankWriter<T> implements ItemWriter<T> {
#Override
public void write(List<? extends T> items) throws Exception {
}
}
Now, in my processor I have this:
public class FileInfoItemProcessor implements ItemProcessor<FileInfo, FileInfo> {
.....
#Override
public FileInfo process(final FileInfo FileInfo) throws Exception {
myCustomStuff () {
......
}
}
public static void myCustomStuff() {
......
......
}
}
Question: As all the objects are passed to processor, I can deal with them in my processor itself rather using any transformations etc AND since my purpose get solved by using processor, is it a good practice? or I must use a writer/custom-writer to get the job done?
I think doing the REST POST call in the writer is more appropriate than doing it in the processor. A REST POST call is a kind of write operation to a remote location.
So you can omit the processor (since it is optional) and move that code to the item writer (instead of using a NoOp item writer with an empty write method).
I am trying to use the multiline IteamReader following the spring-batch-sample at https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-batch/tree/main/spring-batch-samples#multiline
I am running into compilation error as below -
I am sure there is something related to generics as it looking for class implementing ItemReader but the AggregateItemReader implements ItemReader<List>.
public class AggregateItemReader<T> implements ItemReader<List<T>> {
you can find my code here - https://github.com/arpit9mittal/spring-batch-demo/blob/master/src/main/java/my/demo/batch/BatchConfiguration.java
UPDATE:
I suppressed the generics and updated the AggregateItemReader as below inorder to call ItemStreamReader open() method.
public class AggregateItemReader<T> implements ItemStreamReader<List<T>> {
private static final Log LOG = LogFactory.getLog(AggregateItemReader.class);
private ItemStreamReader<AggregateItem<T>> itemReader;
I noticed that the ItemWriter is writing lists of record instead of record per line
[Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH45,quantity=978,price=98.34,customer=customer1], Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH46,quantity=112,price=18.12,customer=customer2]]
[Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH47,quantity=245,price=12.78,customer=customer3], Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH48,quantity=108,price=9.25,customer=customer4], Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH49,quantity=854,price=23.39,customer=customer5]]
[Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH47,quantity=245,price=12.78,customer=customer6], Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH48,quantity=108,price=9.25,customer=customer7], Trade: [isin=UK21341EAH49,quantity=854,price=23.39,customer=customer8]]
AND When i try to add a processor, it complains that processor cannot convert the list into Trade object.
#Bean
public ItemProcessor<Trade, Trade> processor() {
return new ItemProcessor<Trade, Trade>() {
#Override
public Trade process(Trade item) throws Exception {
item.setProcessed(true);
return item;
}
};
}
#SuppressWarnings({ "rawtypes", "unchecked" })
#Bean
public Step multilineStep(
AggregateItemReader reader,
ItemProcessor processor,
FlatFileItemWriter writer,
StepItemReadListener itemReadListener) {
return stepBuilderFactory.get("multiLineStep")
.chunk(1)
.reader(reader)
.writer(writer)
.processor(processor)
.build();
}
ERROR:
java.lang.ClassCastException: java.util.ArrayList cannot be cast to my.demo.batch.multiline.Trade
at my.demo.batch.BatchConfiguration$2.process(BatchConfiguration.java:1) ~[main/:na]
at org.springframework.batch.core.step.item.SimpleChunkProcessor.doProcess(SimpleChunkProcessor.java:134) ~[spring-batch-core-4.3.3.jar:4.3.3]
at org.springframework.batch.core.step.item.SimpleChunkProcessor.transform(SimpleChunkProcessor.java:319) ~[spring-batch-core-4.3.3.jar:4.3.3]
at org.springframework.batch.core.step.item.SimpleChunkProcessor.process(SimpleChunkProcessor.java:210) ~[spring-batch-core-4.3.3.jar:4.3.3]
at org.springframework.batch.core.step.item.ChunkOrientedTasklet.execute(ChunkOrientedTasklet.java:77) ~[spring-batch-core-4.3.3.jar:4.3.3]
HELP:
How can we make it work without suppressing generics ?
How to ensure that ItemReader returns list just the same way as it does with chunk processing, so that ItemProcessor and ItemWriter works as usual ?
Is it possible to do so without extending the SimpleStepBuilder & SimpleChunkProvider ?
You need to be consistent in what the type of the items is that you want to handle on batch level. According to your step definition it is Trade. By calling <Trade, Trade>chunk(1) on the step builder, you declare that your batch should read items of type Trade with a chunk size of 1 (i.e. one at a time) and pass these on to a writer for items of type Trade. In this case, you need to supply a reader of type ItemReader<Trade>, a writer of type ItemWriter<Trade> and optionally a processor of type ItemProcessor<Trade, Trade>.
The problem is that your reader is of type ItemReader<List<Trade>>, i.e. it does not yield a Trade for each invocation of its read method but a list of trades.
If you want to use the AggregateItemReader you need to wrap it into a custom reader that works as an adapter and actually returns Trade items and not List<Trade>.
For example, the custom read method could look like this:
public Trade read() throws Exception {
if (queue.isEmpty()) {
List<Trade> trades = aggregateItemReader.read();
if (trades != null) {
queue.addAll(trades);
}
}
return queue.poll();
}
with queue initialized as
private Deque<Trade> queue = new ArrayDeque<>();
ItemReader is reading data from DB2 and gave java object ClaimDto. Now the ClaimProcessor takes in the object of ClaimDto and return CompositeClaimRecord object which comprises of claimRecord1 and claimRecord2 which to be sent to two different Kafka topics. How to write claimRecord1 and claimRecord2 to topic1 and topic2 respectively.
Just write a custom ItemWriter that does exactly that.
public class YourItemWriter implements ItemWriter<CompositeClaimRecord>` {
private final ItemWriter<Record1> writer1;
private final ItemWriter<Record2> writer2;
public YourItemWriter(ItemWriter<Record1> writer1, ItemWriter<Record2> writer2>) {
this.writer1=writer1;
this.writer2=writer2;
}
public void write(List<CompositeClaimRecord> items) throws Exception {
for (CompositeClaimRecord record : items) {
writer1.write(Collections.singletonList(record.claimRecord1));
writer2.write(Collections.singletonList(record.claimRecord2));
}
}
}
Or instead of writing 1 record at a time convert the single list into 2 lists and pass that along. But error handling might be a bit of a challenge that way. \
public class YourItemWriter implements ItemWriter<CompositeClaimRecord>` {
private final ItemWriter<Record1> writer1;
private final ItemWriter<Record2> writer2;
public YourItemWriter(ItemWriter<Record1> writer1, ItemWriter<Record2> writer2>) {
this.writer1=writer1;
this.writer2=writer2;
}
public void write(List<CompositeClaimRecord> items) throws Exception {
List<ClaimRecord1> record1List = items.stream().map(it -> it.claimRecord1).collect(Collectors.toList());
List<ClaimRecord2> record2List = items.stream().map(it -> it.claimRecord2).collect(Collectors.toList());
writer1.write(record1List);
writer2.write(record2List);
}
}
You can use a ClassifierCompositeItemWriter with two KafkaItemWriters as delegates (one for each topic).
The Classifier would classify items according to their type (claimRecord1 or claimRecord2) and route them to the corresponding kafka item writer (topic1 or topic2).
I had a problem with a Spring Batch job for reading a large XML file (a few million records) and saving the records from it to a database. The job uses chunk of 100 elements and MultiResourceItemReader for reading the XML, ItemProcessor for processed records and ItemWriter for writing records to the database using JPA and EntityManager. The problem is that when call persist operation the job ends up with OutOfMemoryError (I tried to comment writer phase and the problem does not occur).
public class MyClassWriter implements ItemWriter<MyObject> {
#Autowired
private MyDelegate delegate;
#Override
public void write(List<? extends MyObject> items) throws Exception {
...
List<MyObject> foos2 = (List<MyObject>)(List<?>)items;
delegate.setInsert(foos2);
...
}
and
public void setInsert(List<MyObject> list) {
for (MyObject el : list) {
em.persist(el);
}
em.flush();
em.clear(); //I tried to call clear operation too, but not solved problem
}
Any suggestion for me?
It seems the OutOfMemoryException is caused when trying to save too many items at once, try saving the items in batches:
int c = 0;
for (MyObject mo : list) {
em.persist(mo);
if (++c % 1000 == 0) {
em.flush();
}
}
// save any remaining items
em.flush();
In Spring batch I need to pass the items read by an ItemReader to two different processors and writer. What I'm trying to achieve is that...
+---> ItemProcessor#1 ---> ItemWriter#1
|
ItemReader ---> item ---+
|
+---> ItemProcessor#2 ---> ItemWriter#2
This is needed because items written by ItemWriter#1 should be processed in a completely different way compared to the ones written by ItemWriter#2.
Moreover, ItemReader reads item from a database, and the queries it executes are so computational expensive that executing the same query twice should be discarded.
Any hint about how to achieve such set up ? Or, at least, a logically equivalent set up ?
This solution is valid if your item should be processed by processor #1 and processor #2
You have to create a processor #0 with this signature:
class Processor0<Item, CompositeResultBean>
where CompositeResultBean is a bean defined as
class CompositeResultBean {
Processor1ResultBean result1;
Processor2ResultBean result2;
}
In your Processor #0 just delegate work to processors #1 and #2 and put result in CompositeResultBean
CompositeResultBean Processor0.process(Item item) {
final CompositeResultBean r = new CompositeResultBean();
r.setResult1(processor1.process(item));
r.setResult2(processor2.process(item));
return r;
}
Your own writer is a CompositeItemWriter that delegate to writer CompositeResultBean.result1 or CompositeResultBean.result2 (look at PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter, maybe can help)
I followed Luca's suggestion to use PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter as writer and I was able to work with two different entities in one single step.
First of all what I did was to define a DTO that stores the two entities/results from the processor
public class DatabaseEntry {
private AccessLogEntry accessLogEntry;
private BlockedIp blockedIp;
public AccessLogEntry getAccessLogEntry() {
return accessLogEntry;
}
public void setAccessLogEntry(AccessLogEntry accessLogEntry) {
this.accessLogEntry = accessLogEntry;
}
public BlockedIp getBlockedIp() {
return blockedIp;
}
public void setBlockedIp(BlockedIp blockedIp) {
this.blockedIp = blockedIp;
}
}
Then I passed this DTO to the writer, a PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter class where I define two customized methods to write the entities into the database, see my writer code below:
#Configuration
public class LogWriter extends LogAbstract {
#Autowired
private DataSource dataSource;
#Bean()
public PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter<DatabaseEntry> itemWriterAccessLogEntry() {
PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter<DatabaseEntry> propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter = new PropertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter<DatabaseEntry>();
propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter.setFieldsUsedAsTargetMethodArguments(new String[]{"accessLogEntry", "blockedIp"});
propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter.setTargetObject(this);
propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter.setTargetMethod("saveTransaction");
return propertyExtractingDelegatingItemWriter;
}
public void saveTransaction(AccessLogEntry accessLogEntry, BlockedIp blockedIp) throws SQLException {
writeAccessLogTable(accessLogEntry);
if (blockedIp != null) {
writeBlockedIp(blockedIp);
}
}
private void writeBlockedIp(BlockedIp entry) throws SQLException {
PreparedStatement statement = dataSource.getConnection().prepareStatement("INSERT INTO blocked_ips (ip,threshold,startDate,endDate,comment) VALUES (?,?,?,?,?)");
statement.setString(1, entry.getIp());
statement.setInt(2, threshold);
statement.setTimestamp(3, Timestamp.valueOf(startDate));
statement.setTimestamp(4, Timestamp.valueOf(endDate));
statement.setString(5, entry.getComment());
statement.execute();
}
private void writeAccessLogTable(AccessLogEntry entry) throws SQLException {
PreparedStatement statement = dataSource.getConnection().prepareStatement("INSERT INTO log_entries (date,ip,request,status,userAgent) VALUES (?,?,?,?,?)");
statement.setTimestamp(1, Timestamp.valueOf(entry.getDate()));
statement.setString(2, entry.getIp());
statement.setString(3, entry.getRequest());
statement.setString(4, entry.getStatus());
statement.setString(5, entry.getUserAgent());
statement.execute();
}
}
With this approach you can get the wanted inital behaviour from a single reader for processing multiple entities and save them in a single step.
You can use a CompositeItemProcessor and CompositeItemWriter
It won't look exactly like your schema, it will be sequential, but it will do the job.
this is the solution I came up with.
So, the idea is to code a new Writer that "contains" both an ItemProcessor and an ItemWriter. Just to give you an idea, we called it PreprocessoWriter, and that's the core code.
private ItemWriter<O> writer;
private ItemProcessor<I, O> processor;
#Override
public void write(List<? extends I> items) throws Exception {
List<O> toWrite = new ArrayList<O>();
for (I item : items) {
toWrite.add(processor.process(item));
}
writer.write(toWrite);
}
There's a lot of things being left aside. Management of ItemStream, for instance. But in our particular scenario this was enough.
So you can just combine multiple PreprocessorWriter with CompositeWriter.
There is an other solution if you have a reasonable amount of items (like less than 1 Go) : you can cache the result of your select into a collection wrapped in a Spring bean.
Then u can just read the collection twice with no cost.