I have a database table in which there is a field which I do not want to map to my model class while making a get call. Is there any annotation to handle this use case?
When persisting Java objects into database records using an Object-Relational Mapping (ORM) framework, we can ignore fields by adding the #Transient annotation to those fields.
#Entity
#Table(name = "Users")
public class User {
#Id
private Integer id;
private String email;
private String password;
#Transient
private Date loginTime;
// getters and setters
}
Related
I know there has been multiple questions on bidirectional relations using spring jpa in the past but my case is a little bit different because i am using 3 entities with 2 relationships to implement a medical system
I have 3 entities : doctor/patient/appointment
here is the code for the 3 entities
please note all setters , getters and constructors implemented but ommited here for clarity
Patient class
#Entity
public class resPatient {
#Id
#GeneratedValue( strategy= GenerationType.IDENTITY )
private long code;
private String name;
private String gender;
private String email;
private String mobile;
private int age;
private String notes;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "patient")
List<resPackageMembership> memberships;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "patient")
List<resAppointment> appointments;
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY,mappedBy = "patient")
List<resMedImage> medImages;
Doctor class
#Entity
public class resDoctor {
#Id
#GeneratedValue( strategy= GenerationType.IDENTITY )
private long code;
private String name;
private String mobile;
private String email;
private String gender;
private int age;
private String speciality;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "doctor")
List<resAppointment> appointments;
Appointment class
#Entity
public class resAppointment {
#Id
#GeneratedValue( strategy= GenerationType.IDENTITY )
private long code;
private String speciality;
#Basic
#Temporal(TemporalType.TIMESTAMP)
private Date dateCreated;
#Basic
#Temporal(TemporalType.TIMESTAMP)
private Date dateToVisit;
private String status;
private String notes;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "doctorCode")
private resDoctor doctor;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "patientCode")
private resPatient patient;
the way my medical system should work is that when i get a patient using my restful controller i want all the patient data including his appointments but this leads to an infinite loop as the appointment has the doctor which also has appointments and so on.
i cannot user #JSONIGNORE as there are 2 relationships i want to get the patient with his appointments which should have the doctor without the appointments array and should not have any patient data as i already am in the patient object
As a general best-practice, it's recommended to separate the entities from the data transfer objects used for the rest controllers. With DTO's in place, you have more control on which data to include and serialize within them to avoid the circlular references.
If you like check out https://bootify.io, it generates the DTOs from your database schema, but the custom endpoint you still need to define/build.
I develop an annotation processor called beanknife recently, it support generate DTO from any class. You need config by annotation. But you don't need change the original class. This library support configuring on a separate class. Of course you can choose which property you want and which you not need. And you can add new property by the static method in the config class. For your question:
// this will generate a DTO class named "resPatientView".
// You can change this name using genName attribute.
#ViewOf(value=resPatient.class, includePattern = ".*")
public class PatientViewConfigure {
// here tell the processor to automatically convert the property appointments from List<resAppointment> to List<resAppointmentWithoutPatient>.
// resAppointmentWithoutPatient is the generated class configured at the following.
// Note, although at this moment it not exists and your idea think it is an error.
// this code really can be compiled, and after compiled, all will ok.
#OverrideViewProperty("appointments")
private List<resAppointmentWithoutPatient> appointments;
}
// here generated a class named resAppointmentWithoutPatient whick has all properties of resAppointment except patient
#ViewOf(value=resAppointment.class, genName="resAppointmentWithoutPatient", includePattern = ".*", excludes={"patient"})
public class AppointmentWithoutPatientViewConfigure {
// the doctor property will be converted to its dto version which defined by the configure class DoctorWithoutAppointmentsViewConfigure.
#OverrideViewProperty("doctor")
private resDoctorWithoutAppointments doctor;
}
// here we generate a class which has all properties of resDoctor except appointments
#ViewOf(value=resDoctor.class, genName="resDoctorWithoutAppointments", includePattern = ".*", excludes={"appointments"})
public class DoctorWithoutAppointmentsViewConfigure {}
// in you rest controller. return the dto instead of the entities.
resPatient patient = ...
resPatientView dto = resPatientView.read(patient);
List<resPatient> patients = ...
List<resPatientView> dto = resPatientView.read(patients);
At the end, the class resPatientView will has the same shap with resPatient except its appointments not having patient property and its doctor property is replaced with a version without appointments property.
Here are more examples.
The version 1.10 is ready. Will fix some bug and support the configure bean to be managed by spring.
I have an Entity which is mapped to a database view and I want to avoid spring from creating table for it, I've tried #Immutable annotation but it's not working, also I want the program to create the view for entity from my script file if it's not created.
#Data
#Entity
#Immutable
public class ViewRequest {
#Id
private Long id;
private Date createDate;
private String requestType;
private String customerUser;
private Long customerUserId;
private RequestStatusEnum requestStatus;
}
any help is appreciated.
Thanks
The #Subselect annotation is the only annotation in Hibernate that prevents the creation of the corresponding table for an #Entity:
#Data
#Entity
#Immutable
#Subselect("select * from VIEW_REQUEST")
public class ViewRequest {
#Id
private Long id;
private Date createDate;
private String requestType;
private String customerUser;
private Long customerUserId;
private RequestStatusEnum requestStatus;
}
Special thanks to this answer :
Exclude a specific table from being created by hibernate?
and for the view creation, you should add your script to a file called data.sql in resources folder, and the file would be automatically executed after table updates of hibernate.
I have a rare scenario where i have to maintain two tables say
Student_failed and Student_passed. both have exactly same schema.
#Entity
#Table(name = "student_failed")
public class StudentFailed {
#Id
#Column(name="id")
private String id;
#Column(name="student_name")
private String studentName;
#Column(name="home_town")
private String homeTown;
...
}
and
#Entity
#Table(name = "student_passed")
public class StudentPassed {
#Id
#Column(name="id")
private String id;
#Column(name="student_name")
private String studentName;
#Column(name="home_town")
private String homeTown;
...
}
as both entities are same i want to use single entity for both table. I have two different controllers that do crud operations on either of the tables.
Can i use single entity and map it to both the tables? I came across #SecondaryTables annotation but i am not sure it if will work.
PS: i know its a bad approach to keep two different tables with same fields but due to some specific requirement i am not allowed to do that).
I'm working with Spring App, so to work with DB I use Spring Data JPA. Firstly I saved an object. And after some time I need to update this object in the table. But at this moment my object contains one field which is null. But I don't want to update this field with null. So my question is how to prevent updating fields with null? Maybe there is an annotation or some property to solve my problem.My entity:
#Entity
#Table(name = "users")
#Getter
#Setter
#NoArgsConstructor
#AllArgsConstructor
public class User {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
#Column(name = "user_id")
private Long id;
#NotNull
#Column(name = "user_name")
#Field
private String username;
#NotNull
#Column(name = "user_identity")
private String identity;
#Column(name="user_image")
private String image;
#Column(name="user_joined")
private String date;
#Column(name="user_origin")
private String origin;
#Column(name="user_sub")
private String sub;
I save and update this entity with implementation of JpaRepository:
#Repository
public interface UserRepository extends JpaRepository<User, Long>
it looks like this:
#Autowired
private UserRepository userRepository;
....
userRepository.save(user);
I've saved my object with not null sub-field. And now I want to update some fields of saved entity, but not sub field, which is null in current object. I wonder if there is any possibility to avoid changing user_sub field to null?
You can add #DynamicUpdate annotation to your User class. This will ignore the fields whose values are null. You can simply do like:
//other annotations
#DynamicUpdate
public class User {
// other codes inside class
}
You can follow a good example from Mkyong's site.
Thanks, guys. I found the solution: #Query will help to update fields that I need
Hi I am new to Spring Data JPA and I am wondering even though I pass the Id to the entity, the Spring data jpa is inserting instead of merge. I thought when I implement the Persistable interface and implement the two methods:
public Long getId();
public Boolean isNew();
It will automatically merge instead of persist.
I have an entity class called User like:
#Entity
#Table(name = "T_USER")
public class User implements Serializable, Persistable<Long> {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
#Column(name = "USER_ID")
private Long id;
#Column(name = "CREATION_TIME", nullable = false)
private Date creationTime;
#Column(name = "FIRST_NAME", nullable = false)
private String firstName;
#Column(name = "LAST_NAME", nullable = false)
private String lastName;
#Column(name = "MODIFICATION_TIME", nullable = false)
private Date modificationTime;
And have another class
#Entity
#Table(name = "T_USER_ROLE")
public class UserRole implements Serializable, Persistable<Long> {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long roleId;
#Column(name = "ROLE_NAME")
private String userRole;
}
I have a custom repository called UserRepostory extending JpaReopistory. I am hitting the save for merge and persist as I see the implementation demonstrate that Spring Data Jpa uses above two methods to either update or insert.
#Repository
public interface UserRepository extends JpaRepository<User, Long> {
}
I have been trying to figure out but didn't get any clue. Maybe you
guys can help.
I ran into this issue, tried to implement Persistable to no avail, and then looked into the Spring Data JPA source. I don't necessarily see this in your example code, but I have a #Version field in my entity. If there is a #Version field Spring Data will test that value to determine if the entity is new or not. If the #Version field is not a primitive and is null then the entity is considered new.
This threw me for a long time in my tests because I was not setting the version field in my representation but only on the persisted entity. I also don't see this documented in the otherwise helpful Spring Data docs (which is another issue...).
Hope that helps someone!
By default Spring Data JPA inspects the identifier property of the given entity. If the identifier property is null, then the entity will be assumed as new, otherwise as not new. It's Id-Property inspection Reference
If you are using Spring JPA with EntityManager calling .merge() will update your entity and .persist() will insert.
#PersistenceContext
private EntityManager em;
#Override
#Transactional
public User save(User user) {
if (user.getId() == null) {
em.persist(user);
return user;
} else {
return em.merge(user);
}
}
There is no need to implement the Persistable interface.