I am implementing feature flags in my spring application and I would like to use togglz. I would like the features to be based on the environment. For example a feature is being worked or tested so I could have it on in DEV and QA, but it's not ready for the public, so it's turned off in PROD.
I'm looking through the togglz doc and their activation strategies, but none of them seem to be based on the environment. Do I need to implement a custom strategy or can I use one of the existing strategies in a creative way?
If there any concise example that would be most helpful.
Option 1
There is an existing activation strategy by profile provided by togglz-spring-core : SpringProfileActivationStrategy
Option 2
If you want to create yours, it can be achieved easily :
#Configuration
public class ProfileStrategy implements ActivationStrategy {
private static final String PROFILE_PARAM = "profile";
private final Environment environment;
public ProfileStrategy(Environment environment) {
this.environment = environment;
}
#Override
public String getId() {
return "profile";
}
#Override
public String getName() {
return "Profile strategy";
}
#Override
public boolean isActive(FeatureState featureState, FeatureUser featureUser) {
String profile = featureState.getParameter(PROFILE_PARAM);
return profile != null && Arrays.asList(environment.getActiveProfiles()).contains(profile);
}
#Override
public Parameter[] getParameters() {
return new Parameter[] {
ParameterBuilder.create(PROFILE_PARAM)
.label("Profil")
.description("Profile to activate feature")
.largeText()
};
}
}
Related
I thought / hoped that overriding property values using ConfigurationProperties would be as easy as reading them, but it isn't, so I feel like I'm missing something trivial as right now I have a JavaFX application with different screens in which I can read and use properties that are in the application.yml, but one of the screens is a "support" screen where some admin should come when logging on and they should be able to change the values in the application.yml
I cannot find what I'm doing wrong as I do see the setter being called when I change something in the support screen but the application.yml stays unchanged :-/
#Configuration
#ConfigurationProperties
public class ConfigProperties {
private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(ConfigProperties.class);
String deviceId;
String resolution;
public String getDeviceId() {
return deviceId;
}
public void setDeviceId(String deviceId) {
this.deviceId = deviceId;
}
public String getResolution() {
return resolution;
}
public void setResolution(String resolution) {
this.resolution = resolution;
LOGGER.debug("resolution set to {}", resolution);
}
screen controller
public void btnSaveClicked(ActionEvent actionEvent) {
btnSave.setDisable(true);
configProperties.setDeviceId(txtDevice.getText());
configProperties.setResolution(txtResolution.getText());
}
in the pom the only spring references are spring-boot-starter and spring-boot-autoconfigure, both 2.7.4
I have a class containing constants:
namespace Test.AppService
{
public static class Const
{
public const bool Tmr = false;
public const int Pti = 10;
...
I was wondering if this would be a good candidate for dependency injection or would it be better to leave it as it is and just add using for Test.AppService into every page? Would appreciate advice on this.
Reading your comment about needing to use a different set of constants if that is something you see happening then Dependency injection makes sense. For example if you are using different environments like DEV, QA, Release comes to mind.
You would need to declare an interface with all your public fields. Implement that Interface in different classes with all the possible different scenarios. Then you can register your interface and the class with your desired set of values that you would be able to swap as needed.
For example:
public interface IConfiguration
{
public string ConnectionString {get;}
}
public class QaValues : IConfiguration
{
public string ConnectionString
{ get
{
return "qaconnection";
}
}
}
public class ReleaseValues : IConfiguration
{
public string ConnectionString
{ get
{
return "releaseconnection";
}
}
}
DependencyService.Register<IConfiguration,QaValues>();
I am trying to implement proxy design pattern for caching services as below.
public interface IProductService
{
int ProcessOrder(int orderId);
}
public class ProductService : IProductService
{
public int ProcessOrder(int orderId)
{
// implementation
}
}
public class CachedProductService : IProductService
{
private IProductService _realService;
public CachedProductService(IProductService realService)
{
_realService = realService;
}
public int ProcessOrder(int orderId)
{
if (exists-in-cache)
return from cache
else
return _realService.ProcessOrder(orderId);
}
}
How do I to use IoC container (Unity/Autofac) to create real service and cached service objects as I can register IProductService to ProductService or CachedProductService but CachedProductService in turn requires a IProductService object (ProductService) during creation.
I am trying to arrive at something like this:
The application will target IProductService and request IoC container for an instance and depending on the configuration of the application (if cache is enabled/disabled), the application will be provided with ProductService or CachedProductService instance.
Any ideas? Thanks.
Without a container your graph would look like this:
new CachedProductService(
new ProductService());
Here's an example using Simple Injector:
container.Register<IProductService, ProductService>();
// Add caching conditionally based on a config switch
if (ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["usecaching"] == "true")
container.RegisterDecorator<IProductService, CachedProductService>();
I've Spring cache implemented as below
#Component
public class KPCacheExample {
private static final Logger LOG = LoggerFactory.getLogger(KPCacheExample.class);
#CachePut(value="kpCache")
public String saveCache(String userName, String password){
LOG.info("Called saveCache");
return userName;
}
#Cacheable(value="kpCache")
public String getCache(String userName, String password){
LOG.info("Called getCache");
return "kp";
}
}
And Java Config file
#Configuration
#ComponentScan(basePackages={"com.kp"})
public class GuavaCacheConfiguration {
#Bean
public CacheManager cacheManager() {
GuavaCacheManager guavaCacheManager = new GuavaCacheManager("kpCache");
guavaCacheManager.setCacheBuilder(CacheBuilder.newBuilder().expireAfterAccess(2000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS).removalListener(new KPRemovalListener()));
return guavaCacheManager;
}
}
By default the spring uses put method in the cache interface to update/put values in the cache. How can I force the spring to use putifabsent method to be invoked, such that I can get null value if cache is missed or in other wards first request to the method with unique username and password should return null and subsequent request to that username and password should return username.
Well, looking through Spring's Cache Abstraction source, there does not appear to be a configuration setting (switch) to default the #CachePut to use the "atomic" putIfAbsent operation.
You might be able to simulate the "putIfAbsent" using the unless (or condition) attribute(s) of the #CachePut annotation, something like (based on the Guava impl)...
#CachePut(value="Users", key="#user.name" unless="#root.caches[0].getIfPresent(#user.name) != null")
public User save(User user){
return userRepo.save(user);
}
Also note, I did not test this expression, and it would not be "atomic" or portable using a different Cache impl. The expression ("#root.caches[0].get(#user.name) != null") maybe more portable.
Giving up the "atomic" property may not be desirable so you could also extend the (Guava)CacheManager to return a "custom" Cache (based on GuavaCache) that overrides the put operation to delegate to "putIfAbsent" instead...
class CustomGuavaCache extends GuavaCache {
CustomGuavaCache(String name, com.google.common.cache.Cache<Object, Object> cache, boolean allowNullValues) {
super(name, cache, allowNullValues);
}
#Override
public void put(Object key, Object value) {
putIfAbsent(key, value);
}
}
See the GuavaCache class for more details.
Then...
class CustomGuavaCacheManager extends GuavaCacheManager {
#Override
protected Cache createGuavaCache(String name) {
return new CustomGuavaCache(name, createNativeGuavaCache(name), isAllowNullValues());
}
}
See GuavaCacheManager for further details, and specifically, have a look at line 93 and createGuavaCache(String name).
Hope this helps, or at least gives you some more ideas.
Edit:
Perhaps a more concise way to ask this question is: Does Spring provide a way for me to resolve ambiguous candidates at injection time by providing my own listener/factory/decision logic?
In fact, arguably the #Environmental qualifier on the member field below is unnecessary: if an #Inject-ion is ambiguous... let me help? In fact, #ResolveWith(EnvironmentalResolver.class) would be alright too..
When Spring attempts to inject a dependency (using annotations) I understand that I need to #Qualifier an #Inject point if I am to have multiple components that implement that interface.
What I'd like to do is something like this:
class MyFoo implements Foo {
#Inject
#Environmental
private Bar bar;
}
#Environmental(Environment.Production)
class ProductionBar implements Bar {
}
#Environmental({Environment.Dev, Environment.Test})
class DevAndTestBar implements Bar {
}
I would expect that I need to create some kind of ambiguity resolver which would look something (vaguely) like this:
class EnvironmentalBeanAmbiguityResolver {
// set from configuration, read as a system environment variable, etc.
private Environment currentEnvironment;
public boolean canResolve(Object beanDefinition) {
// true if definition has the #Environmental annotation on it
}
public Object resolve(Collection<Object> beans) {
for (Object bean : beans) {
// return bean if bean #Environmental.values[] contains currentEnvironment
}
throw new RuntimeException(...);
}
}
One example of where this would be useful is we have a service that contacts end-users. Right now I just have a hacked together AOP aspect that before the method call to the "MailSender', checks for a "Production" environment flag and if it is not set, it sends the email to us instead of the users email. I'd like to instead of wrapping this in an AOP aspect specific to mail sending, instead be able to differentiate services based on the current environment. Sometime's it is just a matter of "production" or "not production" as I've demonstrated above, but a per-environment definition works too.
I think this can be reused for region too... e.g. #Regional and #Regional(Region.UnitedStates) and so on and so forth.
I'd imagine #Environmental would actually be a #Qualifier that way if you wanted to depend directly on something environmental you could (an #Environmental(Production) bean would likely depend directly on an #Environmental(Production) collaborator - so no ambiguity for lower level items --- same a #Regional(US) item would depend on other #Regional(US) items expiclitly and would bypass my yet-to-be-understood BeanAmbiguityResolver)
Thanks.
I think I solved this!
Consider the following:
public interface Ambiguity {
public boolean isSatisfiedBy(BeanDefinitionHolder holder);
}
#Target({ METHOD, CONSTRUCTOR, FIELD })
#Retention(RUNTIME)
public #interface Ambiguous {
Class<? extends Ambiguity> value();
}
#Target(TYPE)
#Retention(RUNTIME)
public #interface Environmental {
public static enum Environment {
Development, Testing, Production
};
Environment[] value() default {};
}
#Named
public class EnvironmentalAmbiguity implements Ambiguity {
/* This can be set via a property in applicationContext.xml, which Spring
can use place holder, environment variable, etc. */
Environment env = Environment.Development;
#Override
public boolean isSatisfiedBy(BeanDefinitionHolder holder) {
BeanDefinition bd = holder.getBeanDefinition();
RootBeanDefinition rbd = (RootBeanDefinition) bd;
Class<?> bc = rbd.getBeanClass();
Environmental env = bc.getAnnotation(Environmental.class);
return (env == null) ? false : hasCorrectValue(env);
}
private boolean hasCorrectValue(Environmental e) {
for (Environment env : e.value()) {
if (env.equals(this.env)) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
}
#Named
public class MySuperDuperBeanFactoryPostProcessor implements
BeanFactoryPostProcessor, AutowireCandidateResolver {
private DefaultListableBeanFactory beanFactory;
private AutowireCandidateResolver defaultResolver;
#Override
public void postProcessBeanFactory(ConfigurableListableBeanFactory arg)
throws BeansException {
if (arg instanceof DefaultListableBeanFactory) {
beanFactory = (DefaultListableBeanFactory) arg;
defaultResolver = beanFactory.getAutowireCandidateResolver();
beanFactory.setAutowireCandidateResolver(this);
return;
}
throw new FatalBeanException(
"BeanFactory was not a DefaultListableBeanFactory");
}
#Override
public Object getSuggestedValue(DependencyDescriptor descriptor) {
return defaultResolver.getSuggestedValue(descriptor);
}
#Override
public boolean isAutowireCandidate(BeanDefinitionHolder holder,
DependencyDescriptor descriptor) {
Ambiguity ambiguity = getAmbiguity(descriptor);
if (ambiguity == null) {
return defaultResolver.isAutowireCandidate(holder, descriptor);
}
return ambiguity.isSatisfiedBy(holder);
}
private Ambiguity getAmbiguity(DependencyDescriptor descriptor) {
Ambiguous ambiguous = getAmbiguousAnnotation(descriptor);
if (ambiguous == null) {
return null;
}
Class<? extends Ambiguity> ambiguityClass = ambiguous.value();
return beanFactory.getBean(ambiguityClass);
}
private Ambiguous getAmbiguousAnnotation(DependencyDescriptor descriptor) {
Field field = descriptor.getField();
if (field == null) {
MethodParameter methodParameter = descriptor.getMethodParameter();
if (methodParameter == null) {
return null;
}
return methodParameter.getParameterAnnotation(Ambiguous.class);
}
return field.getAnnotation(Ambiguous.class);
}
}
Now if I have an interface MyInterface and two classes that implement it MyFooInterface and MyBarInterface like this:
public interface MyInterface {
public String getMessage();
}
#Named
#Environmental({ Environment.Testing, Environment.Production })
public class MyTestProdInterface implements MyInterface {
#Override
public String getMessage() {
return "I don't always test my code, but when I do, I do it in production!";
}
}
#Named
#Environmental(Environment.Development)
public class DevelopmentMyInterface implements MyInterface {
#Override
public String getMessage() {
return "Developers, developers, developers, developers!";
}
}
If I want to #Inject MyInterface I would get the same multiple bean definition error that one would expect. But I can add #Ambiguous(EnvironmentalAmbiguity.class) and then the EnvironmentalAmbiguity will tell which bean definition it is satisfied by.
Another approach would have been to use a List and go through them all seeing if they are satisfied by a given bean definition, this would mean that the dependnecy wouldn't need the #Ambiguous annotation. That might be more "IoC-ish" but I also thought it might perform poorly. I have not tested that.