I need to configure request timeouts in code for all routes. I know global timeouts can be configured via following properties in application.properties, but how can they be configured in code?
spring.cloud.gateway.httpclient.connect-timeout=1000
spring.cloud.gateway.httpclient.response-timeout=5s
I have looked at GatewayAutoConfiguration how timeouts are configured by default. HttpClientProperties holds both properties, however it cannot be overwritten.
#Bean
public HttpClientProperties httpClientProperties() {
return new HttpClientProperties();
}
Can this be done in code?
I solved my problem. I created my own bean and used annotation #Primary to be able to create a separate bean with the same type. GatewayAutoConfiguration now uses my bean instead of the default bean.
#Bean
#Primary
public HttpClientProperties overwrittenHttpClientProperties() {
HttpClientProperties p = new HttpClientProperties();
p.setConnectTimeout(3000);
p.setResponseTimeout(Duration.ofMillis(10000));
return p;
}
Related
I am trying to implement Hibernate second level caching in a Spring boot project using Redisson.
I have followed this blog as a reference
https://pavankjadda.medium.com/implement-hibernate-2nd-level-cache-with-redis-spring-boot-and-spring-data-jpa-7cdbf5632883
Also i am trying to initialize the RedissionClient programmatically and not through declaratively /through a config file
Created a spring bean to be initialized which should create the RedissonClient instance.
#Configuration
#Lazy(value = false)
public class RedissonConfig {
#Bean
public RedissonClient redissionClient() {
Config config = new Config();
config.useSingleServer().setAddress("redis://127.0.0.1:6379");
return Redisson.create(config);
}
}
However this bean is never intialized and i get the following error while application startup.
Caused by: org.hibernate.cache.CacheException: Unable to locate Redisson configuration
at org.redisson.hibernate.RedissonRegionFactory.createRedissonClient(RedissonRegionFactory.java:107) ~[redisson-hibernate-53-3.12.1.jar:3.12.1]
at org.redisson.hibernate.RedissonRegionFactory.prepareForUse(RedissonRegionFactory.java:83) ~[redisson-hibernate-53-3.12.1.jar:3.12.1]
It seems Spring boot Hibernate still trying to load the Redisson config through a config file.
is it possible to load the Redission config in spring boot programmatically ?
Best Regards,
Saurav
I just did exactly this, here is how:
you need a custom RegionFactory that is similar to the JndiRedissonRegionFactory but gets its RedissonClient injected somehow.
an instance of this Class, fully configured, is put into the hibernate-properties map. Hibernates internal code is flexible: if the value of hibernate.cache.region.factory_class is a string it is treated as a FQDN. If it is an instance of Class<?>, it will be instantiated. If it is an Object, it will be used.
Spring offers a rather simple way to customize hibernate properties with a bean:
#AutoConfiguration(after = RedissonAutoConfiguration.class, before = JpaAutoConfiguration.class)
#ConditionalOnProperty("spring.jpa.properties.hibernate.cache.use_second_level_cache")
public class HibernateCacheAutoConfiguration {
#Bean
public HibernatePropertiesCustomizer setRegionFactory(RedissonClient redisson) {
return hibernateProperties -> hibernateProperties.put(AvailableSettings.CACHE_REGION_FACTORY, new SpringBootRedissonRegionFactory(redisson));
}
}
My RegionFactory is really simple:
#AllArgsConstructor
public class SpringBootRedissonRegionFactory extends RedissonRegionFactory {
private RedissonClient redissonClient;
#Override
protected RedissonClient createRedissonClient(Map properties) {
return redissonClient;
}
#Override
protected void releaseFromUse() {
}
}
I used the redisson-starter to get a RedissonClient, hence the reference to RedissonAutoConfiguration, but you could just create an instance by hand.
It is possible, but then you need to provide a custom implementation of RegionFactory to Hibernate, which can extends RedissonRegionFactory but uses your own client instance.
I am learning about springboot and trying to connect to a DB2 database. I got that working just fine.
Below are my working DB2 properties:
spring.datasource.url=jdbc:db2://server:port/database:currentSchema=schema-name;
spring.datasource.username=user1
spring.datasource.password=password1
But I renamed them to start with "db2" instead "spring" like:
db2.datasource.url=jdbc:db2://server:port/database:currentSchema=schema-name;
db2.datasource.username=user1
db2.datasource.password=password1
My app still runs, hHowever, when I do that, my controllers no longer return results as they did before the rename.
The reason I ask this is that if I add 2nd data source in the future, I could distinguish easily properties by their data sources if I name them like this.
UPDATE:
Thanks to #Kosta Tenasis answer below and this article (https://www.javadevjournal.com/spring-boot/multiple-data-sources-with-spring-boot/), I was able to resolve and figure this out.
Then going back to my specific question, once you have the configuration for data source in place, you can then modify application.properties to have:
db2.datasource.url=...
instead of having:
spring.datasource.url=...
NOTE1: if you are using Springboot 2.0, they changed to use Hikari and Hikari does not have url property but instead uses jdbc-url, so just change above to:
db2.datasource.jdbc-url=...
NOTE2: In your datasource that you had to create when adding multiple datasources to your project, you will have annotation #ConfigurationProperties. This annotation needs to point to your updated application.properties for datasource (the db2.datasource.url).
By default Spring looks for spring.datasource.** for the properties of the DataSource to connect to.
So you might be getting wrong results because you are not connecting to the database. If you want to configure a DataSource with different,from default, properties you can do like so
#Configuration
public class DataSourceConfig {
#Bean
#ConfigurationProperties(prefix="db2.datasource")
public DataSource dataSource() {
return DataSourceBuilder.create()
.build();
}
And let's say a day comes along and you want a second DataSource you can modify the previous class to something like:
#Configuration
public class DataSourceConfig {
#Bean
#ConfigurationProperties(prefix="db2.datasource")
public DataSource d2Datasource() {
return DataSourceBuilder.create()
.build();
}
#Bean
#ConfigurationProperties(prefix="db3.datasource")
public DataSource db3Datasource() { //pun intented
return DataSourceBuilder.create()
.build();
}
}
and after that in each Class that you want a DataSource you can specify which of the beans you like:
public class DB3DependedClass{
private final DataSource dataSource;
public DB3DependedClass(#Qualifier("db3Datasource") DataSource dataSource){
this.dataSource = dataSource;
}
}
So by default spring will look for
spring.datasource.url (or spring.datasource.jdbc-url)
spring.datasource.username
spring.datasource.password
If you specify another DataSource of your own, those values are not needed.
So in the above example where we specified let's say db3.datasource spring will look for
db3.datasource.url
db3.datasource.username
db3.datasource.password
Important thing here is that the spring IS NOT inferred meaning the complete path is indeed: db3.datasource.url
and NOT
spring.db3.datasource.url
Finally to wrap this up you do have the flexibility to make it start with spring if you want so by declaring a prefix like spring.any.path.ilike.datasouce and of course under that the related values. Spring will pick up either path as long as you specify it.
NOTE: This answer is written solely in the text box provided here and was not tested in an IDE for compilation errors. The logic still holds though
I want to customize some of the codes of OAuth authorization server provided by spring security. the code responsible for generating /oauth/authorize is a bean named AuthorizationEndpoint. in AuthorizationServerEndpointsConfiguration class the following code creates a bean of AuthorizationEndpoint class:
#Bean
public AuthorizationEndpoint authorizationEndpoint() throws Exception {
AuthorizationEndpoint authorizationEndpoint = new AuthorizationEndpoint();
FrameworkEndpointHandlerMapping mapping = getEndpointsConfigurer().getFrameworkEndpointHandlerMapping();
authorizationEndpoint.setUserApprovalPage(extractPath(mapping, "/oauth/confirm_access"));
authorizationEndpoint.setProviderExceptionHandler(exceptionTranslator());
authorizationEndpoint.setErrorPage(extractPath(mapping, "/oauth/error"));
authorizationEndpoint.setTokenGranter(tokenGranter());
authorizationEndpoint.setClientDetailsService(clientDetailsService);
authorizationEndpoint.setAuthorizationCodeServices(authorizationCodeServices());
authorizationEndpoint.setOAuth2RequestFactory(oauth2RequestFactory());
authorizationEndpoint.setOAuth2RequestValidator(oauth2RequestValidator());
authorizationEndpoint.setUserApprovalHandler(userApprovalHandler());
return authorizationEndpoint;
}
I want to override it by a new custom bean. I have created a class which extends AuthorizationEndpoint. for now I have pasted the same code inside this new class.
public class AuthorizationEndpointCustom extends AuthorizationEndpoint {
creating the bean:
#Autowired
private ClientDetailsService clientDetailsService;
#Autowired
AuthorizationServerEndpointsConfiguration asec;
#Bean
// #Order(value = Ordered.LOWEST_PRECEDENCE)
#Primary
public AuthorizationEndpoint authorizationEndpoint () {
AuthorizationEndpointCustom authorizationEndpoint = new AuthorizationEndpointCustom();
FrameworkEndpointHandlerMapping mapping = asec.getEndpointsConfigurer().getFrameworkEndpointHandlerMapping();
authorizationEndpoint.setUserApprovalPage(extractPath(mapping, "/oauth/confirm_access"));
authorizationEndpoint.setProviderExceptionHandler(asec.getEndpointsConfigurer().getExceptionTranslator());
authorizationEndpoint.setErrorPage(extractPath(mapping, "/oauth/error"));
authorizationEndpoint.setTokenGranter(asec.getEndpointsConfigurer().getTokenGranter());
authorizationEndpoint.setClientDetailsService(clientDetailsService);
authorizationEndpoint.setAuthorizationCodeServices(asec.getEndpointsConfigurer().getAuthorizationCodeServices());
authorizationEndpoint.setOAuth2RequestFactory(asec.getEndpointsConfigurer().getOAuth2RequestFactory());
authorizationEndpoint.setOAuth2RequestValidator(asec.getEndpointsConfigurer().getOAuth2RequestValidator());
authorizationEndpoint.setUserApprovalHandler(asec.getEndpointsConfigurer().getUserApprovalHandler());
return authorizationEndpoint;
}
private String extractPath(FrameworkEndpointHandlerMapping mapping, String page) {
String path = mapping.getPath(page);
if (path.contains(":")) {
return path;
}
return "forward:" + path;
}
when I try to create a bean of this new class I encounter the following error:
APPLICATION FAILED TO START
Description:
The bean 'authorizationEndpoint', defined in
org.springframework.security.oauth2.config.annotation.web.configuration.AuthorizationServerEndpointsConfiguration,
could not be registered. A bean with that name has already been
defined in class path resource
[com/example/demo/AuthorizationServerConfig.class] and overriding is
disabled.
Action:
Consider renaming one of the beans or enabling overriding by setting
spring.main.allow-bean-definition-overriding=true
the error goes away by adding the suggested config to application.properties. but the new bean does not replace the framework bean. in another part of my code I accessed the AuthorizationEndpoint from applicationContext. I called the .getClass() of this object and it is the same bean from the framework:
"org.springframework.security.oauth2.provider.endpoint.AuthorizationEndpoint"
how can I force spring to use my bean?
You need a Configuration class
import org.springframework.context.annotation.Bean;
import org.springframework.context.annotation.Configuration;
#Configuration
public class AppConfig {
#Bean
public AuthorizationEndpoint authorizationEndpoint() {
if(...) return new AuthorizationEndpoint();
else return new AuthorizationEndpointCustom();
}
}
I red an article about overriding beans and it seems so messy and unpredictable. read here
it's best to avoid doing so. The solution to disable framework bean lies in excluding the configuration class which creates it. but this means we have to implement the hole thing ourselves.
#SpringBootApplication(exclude=<AuthorizationServerEndpointsConfiguration>.class)
but the solution to overriding the framework endpoints is much easier.all we have to do is create a controller with mapping for /oauth/authorize
Customizing the UI Most of the Authorization Server endpoints are used
primarily by machines, but there are a couple of resource that need a
UI and those are the GET for /oauth/confirm_access and the HTML
response from /oauth/error. They are provided using whitelabel
implementations in the framework, so most real-world instances of the
Authorization Server will want to provide their own so they can
control the styling and content. All you need to do is provide a
Spring MVC controller with #RequestMappings for those endpoints, and
the framework defaults will take a lower priority in the dispatcher.
In the /oauth/confirm_access endpoint you can expect an
AuthorizationRequest bound to the session carrying all the data needed
to seek approval from the user (the default implementation is
WhitelabelApprovalEndpoint so look there for a starting point to
copy). You can grab all the data from that request and render it
however you like, and then all the user needs to do is POST back to
/oauth/authorize with information about approving or denying the
grant. The request parameters are passed directly to a
UserApprovalHandler in the AuthorizationEndpoint so you can interpret
the data more or less as you please. The default UserApprovalHandler
depends on whether or not you have supplied an ApprovalStore in your
AuthorizationServerEndpointsConfigurer (in which case it is an
ApprovalStoreUserApprovalHandler) or not (in which case it is a
TokenStoreUserApprovalHandler). The standard approval handlers accept
the following:
read more here.
there is another question related to this subject: read here
Spring uses either JDK dynamic proxies or CGLIB to create the proxy for a given target object. If a class is annotated with #Configuration, then CGLIB is used.
However, one limitation of Spring AOP is that once the call has finally reached the target object, any method calls that it may make on itself are going to be invoked against the this reference, and not the proxy. This piece of information is important to remember when using #Transactional and in other places as well.
So having that knowledge, in the code below, is Spring injecting the actual instance or the proxy of SimpleBean?
#Configuration
public class Config {
#Bean
public SimpleBean simpleBean() {
return new SimpleBean();
}
#Bean
public SimpleBeanConsumer simpleBeanConsumer() {
return new SimpleBeanConsumer(simpleBean()); //<---
}
}
And what is the behavior if a class is annotation with #Component?
Let me give you another perspective.
Say there is an another bean AnotherBeanConsumer that also needs a simpleBean. Simple Bean has a Singleton scope:
#Configuration
public class Config {
#Bean
public SimpleBean simpleBean() {
return new SimpleBean();
}
#Bean
public SimpleBeanConsumer simpleBeanConsumer() {
return new SimpleBeanConsumer(simpleBean());
}
#Bean
public AnotherBeanConsumer anotherBeanConsumer() {
return new AnotherBeanConsumer(simpleBean());
}
}
Now the question is, how its possible that two calls to simpleBean() made from different methods simpleBeanConsumer and anotherBeanConsumer return the same instance of the simple bean (since its a singleton obviously)?
IMO (and disclaimer, I'm not affiliated with spring or something), This is the main reason of creating proxies that wrap Configurations.
Now indeed Spring AOP has a limitation of calling methods just as you've stated, however who said that spring under-the-hood uses spring AOP? The bytecode instrumentation done on much lower levels doesn't have a limitation like this. After all creating a proxy means: "create a proxy object that will have the same interface but will alter the behavior", right?
For example if you use CGLIB that uses inheritance you could create a proxy out of configuration that looks like this (schematically):
class CGLIB_GENERATED_PROXY extends Config {
private Map<String, Object> singletonBeans;
public SimpleBean simpleBean() {
String name = getNameFromMethodNameMaybePrecached();
if(singletonBeans.get(name) != null) {
return singletonBeans.get(name);
}
else {
SimpleBean bean = super.simpleBean();
singletonBeans.put(name, bean);
return bean;
}
}
....
}
Of course its only a schematic picture, in real life there is an application context that basically provides the access to the map like this, but you get the point.
If its not enough, then there are some even more sophisticated frameworks that spring must make use of in order to load a configuration (like ASM)...
Here is an example:
If you use #ConditionalOnClass(A.class) and the class doesn't really exist in runtime, how spring can load the bytecode of the configuration that uses this configuration and not fail on something like NoClassDefFoundException?
My point is that it goes far beyond the spring AOP, and has its quirks :)
Having said that, nothing that I've describe above requires the real components to be always wrapped in Proxies of any kind. So in the most trivial case, when SimpleBean does not by itself have some annotations that require proxy generation (stuff like #Cached, #Transactional and so forth), Spring won't wrap the object of that type and you'll get a plain SimpleBean object.
I am working with Spring JMS 4.1 to register messages listeners
In my xml configuration file, I have defined a bean named "jmsListenerContainerFactory":
<bean id="jmsListenerContainerFactory"
class="org.springframework.jms.config.DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory"...p:concurrency="3-5".../>
First question : with Spring 4.x version, isn't it better to declare this factory this way : <jms:listener-container ... />
Second and main question : as stated in official doc (24.6.1) : by default, the infrastructure looks for a bean named jmsListenerContainerFactory as the source for the factory to use to create message listener containers. Is it also the case when programmatically registering endpoints this way:
.
SimpleJmsListenerEndpoint endpoint = new SimpleJmsListenerEndpoint();
endpoint.setDestination("...");
endpoint.setMessageListener(message -> {...});
registrar.registerEndpoint(endpoint);
or do we have to set it explicitly this way for example : registrar.setContainerFactoryBeanName("jmsListenerContainerFactory");
Thanks
I don't understand your first question; in the first case, you are defining a DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory (a factory that creates listener containers) whereas the XML is creating a listener container directly.
The factory is useful if you need to create lots of containers with similar properties.
For simple container configuration, when you are not using annotated listeners, it certainly might be simpler to use traditional XML, or #Bean definitions for the container.
For the second question, the default registrar is already populated with the container factory bean name when it is passed into the configureListeners method; you don't have to set it.
SimpleJmsListenerEndpoint always looks for named bean "jmsListenerContainerFactory". so even there is no explicitly setting:
registrar.setContainerFactoryBeanName("jmsListenerContainerFactory");
JmsListenerEndpoint still can find the JmsListenerContainerFactory if there exists bean "jmsListenerContainerFactory".
Mean that in case you need to apply JmsListenerContainerFactory with different bean name, then setting on method registrar.setContainerFactoryBeanName("") doesn't effect at all.
Code below for the work and not working cases:
// config factory class
#Bean(name = "customJMSListenerContainerFactory")
public DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory
listenerQueueFactory() {
DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory factory = new
DefaultJmsListenerContainerFactory();
//more configs...
return factory;
}
// on consumer class
#Configuration
#EnableJms
public class MyConsumer implements JmsListenerConfigurer {
#Override
public void configureJmsListeners(JmsListenerEndpointRegistrar registrar) {
SimpleJmsListenerEndpoint endpoint = new SimpleJmsListenerEndpoint();
registrar.registerEndpoint(endpoint);
// this setting will not work => Spring JMS bug
registrar.setContainerFactoryBeanName("customJMSListenerContainerFactory");
// but this setting works
registrar.setContainerFactory(listenerQueueFactory());
}
}
This is bug of spring jms.