We have properties defined in application.properties, is it appropriate to have the property pulled in a spring-boot #Configuration annotated class to be used for initializing the bean being created. Refer code snippet below
#Configuration
public class MyConfig {
#Value("${a.property.in.application.properties}")
public String aProperty;
#Bean
MyClass myClassInstance() {
return new MyClass(aProperty);
}
}
Simplest example would be creating a datasource instance with url, driver, username, password configured in the application.properties
Is it appropriate?
What could be the possible consequences of continuing to use in this manner?
I'm using this approach for different things like cors configurations. There are probably also disadvantages, but so far it has only had advantages for me. I think it's most times better to have config values outside of the code. That allows you, for example, to use different profiles (local/dev/int/prod). But I would recommend to encrypt things like passwords. I'm using Jasypt.
Related
I'm new to spring dependency-injection and am reaching out to learn about best practices. I would like to know if its a good design philosophy to inject classes annotated with #ConfigurationProperties into service layer classes (annotated with #Service). Im trying to map properties in my application.yml to a config-class as follows -
#ConstructorBinding
#ConfigurationProperties(prefix = "application")
class ApplicationConfig(
val kafka: someDeeplyNestedType = SomeDeeplyNestedObj()
) {
// helper functions
}
I'm then injecting above config class in service layer as follows -
#Service
#EnableConfigurationProperties(ApplicationConfig::class)
class RestService(val config: ApplicationConfig) {
init {
// Reference config object
// Reference application.yml properties via config object.
}
}
I'm curious to know if I can improve upon my current implementation - not sure if its agreeable to pass configuration classes to service-layer classes. I'm also curious to know if theres any better approach to wiring ApplicationConfig without needing to use EnableConfigurationProperties annotation.
It is agreeable, documented, and probably "unrivaled" (only bounded by: "limitations" (no SpEL -> helper functions!?;)).
To work with #ConfigurationProperties beans, you can inject them in the same way as any other bean, as shown in the following example:
#Service
public class MyService {
private final SomeProperties properties;
...
The only problems can arise from the "deeply", not "owning" the (config) structure ...and possibliy from "helper functions".
But
The prefix = "application" "sounds" suspicious!
Note:
[Most - almost All] (official) spring* boot properties, are already "typesafe", and have their object/class representation in spring-boot-autoconfigure packages.
Please study that "typesafe chapter", but also gazing at PropertySource Abstraction.
There is no hard rule for this as in Spring Boot we can add #EnableConfigurationProperties at a class level with stereotype annotations.
As a part of good practices EnableConfigurationProperties or any configuration thing should be part of Configuration class of or main spring boot class so any developer can easily figure out those configuration instead of going any specific service class and then check.
In your case, yo can use #EnableConfigurationProperties annotation in conjunction with #SpringBootApplication annotation.
I've got a spring-boot web application that's mostly working; my DataSource is properly configured by an external application.properties file.
Now I want to add properties to that file to help me instantiate and configure two instances of a class in my app. I have a APNsFactory that I currently instantiate manually and configure using JNDI, but I want to get away from JNDI calls:
#Bean
public
APNsFactory
apnsFactory()
throws
javax.naming.NamingException
{
sLogger.info("Configuring APNsFactory");
InitialContext ctx = new InitialContext();
APNsFactory f = new APNsFactory();
f.setProductionKeystorePath((String) ctx.lookup("java:comp/env/apns/prod/keystorePath"));
f.setProductionKeystorePassword((String) ctx.lookup("java:comp/env/apns/prod/keystorePassword"));
f.setDevelopmentKeystorePath((String) ctx.lookup("java:comp/env/apns/dev/keystorePath"));
f.setDevelopmentKeystorePassword((String) ctx.lookup("java:comp/env/apns/dev/keystorePassword"));
return f;
}
When running before in a standalone webapp container, Spring properly called that method and the JNDI context from the container’s <env-entry> tags was available.
I'm trying to update my APNsFactory to be a proper Spring FactoryBean<>, and I’ve given it a couple of #Autowire String variables that I want to be set by Spring Boot from the application.properties file.
For bonus points, I want this to be usable both in Spring Boot and in a standalone container like Tomcat or Resin.
For the life of me, I can't figure out how to get Spring to do this. There are dozens of examples for DataSources and other Beans already implemented by Spring, but none for a completely custom one, using application.properties, in a Spring Boot web environment.
I've seen some examples that use an XML config file, but I'm not sure how to do that with Spring Boot.
I don't think you need a factory bean here.
You already have spring boot that can read application.properties out-of-the-box:
So try the following:
Create key/values in the application.properties file:
myapp.keystore.path=...
myapp.keystore.passwd=...
// the same for other properties
Create ConfigurationProperties class
#ConfigurationProperties(prefix="myapp.keystore")
public class MyAppKeyStoreConfigProperties {
private String path; // the names must match to those defined in the properties file
private String passwd;
... getters, setters
}
In the class marked with #Configuration (the one where you create #Bean public APNsFactory apnsFactory()) do the following:
#Configuration
// Note the following annotation:
#EnableConfigurationProperties(MyAppKeyStoreConfigProperties.class)
public class MyConfiguration {
// Note the injected configuration parameter
#Bean public APNsFactory apnsFactory(MyAppKeyStoreConfigProperties config) {
APNsFactory f = new APNsFactory();
f.setProductionKeystorePath(config.getKeyPath());
and so on
}
}
I've intentionally didn't show the separation between production/dev stuff.
In spring boot you have profiles so that the same artifact (WAR, JAR whatever) can be configured to run with different profile and depending on that the corresponding properties will be read.
Example:
If you're running with prod profile, then in addition to application.properties that will be loaded anyway, you can put these keystore related definitions to application-prod.properties (the suffix matches the profile name) - spring boot will load those automatically. The same goes for dev profile of course.
Now I haven't totally understand the "bonus points" task :) This mechanism is spring boot proprietary way of dealing with configuration. In "standalone" server it should still have a WAR with spring boot inside so it will use this mechanism anyway. Maybe you can clarify more, so that I / our colleagues could provide a better answer
Upgrading an existing system to Spring Boot with Auto config. Currently the system is all Java config. I'm confused over whether to continue the use of #Profile. Is this annotation no longer needed? I searched extensively about upgrading and found only references to non-Spring Java migration and creating new projects.
Typical #Profile usage in our configuration classes looks something like:
#Bean
#Profile("is-standalone")
public Service unsecuredService(SomeApi someApi) {
return new ...
}
I inferred from the Spring Boot examples that using one of the #Conditional annotations is recommended like this:
#Bean
#ConditionalOnProperty("unsecured.enabled")
public Service unsecuredService(SomeApi someApi) {
return new ...
}
Then in a YAML file the is-standalone Profile enables or disables all the various properties for that Profile. Is this the proper way to upgrade? To repeat a question from above differently, can the #Profile usage be left as is? This is for a fairly large project, the upgrade is non-trivial, so I would like to do this only once!
Depends where your previous #Profile annotation is coming from. If you're using Spring's #Profile, the functionality is as follows:
Annotating a class with #Profile("dev") will load the class and register it in the Spring context only when the dev profile is active
Annotating a class with #Profile("!dev") will load the class and register it in the Spring context only when the dev profile is inactive
If this sounds like what you have already, no change is needed.
I have a simple Spring MVC 5 project, with security layer enabled. Everything works good except the properties loading, only on Security Config.
I let you the scenario so you can see it.
application.properties (located at src/main/resources)
com.company.myapp.prop=myprop
MainConfig.java
#Configuration
public class MainConfig implements WebMvcConfigurer {
#Value("${com.company.myapp.prop}")
private String prop;
#Bean
public MySpecialBean mySpecialBean() {
System.out.println(prop); // output > myprop
return new MySpecialBean();
}
}
SecurityConfig.java
#Configuration
#EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfig extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
#Value("${com.company.myapp.prop}")
private String prop;
#Bean
public MySpecialSecurityBean mySpecialSecurityBean() {
System.out.println(prop); // output > null
return new MySpecialSecurityBean();
}
}
I don't understand why it's happening. I already switched the #EnableWebSecurity annotation to the app class, try to set the PropertySourcesPlaceholderConfigurer myself, but nothing works.
Do you have any idea what's going on?
From official docs about #PropertySource:
Resolving ${...} placeholders in <bean> and #Value annotations
In order to resolve ${...} placeholders in definitions or #Value annotations using properties from a PropertySource, you must ensure that an appropriate embedded value resolver is registered in the BeanFactory used by the ApplicationContext. This happens automatically when using in XML. When using #Configuration classes this can be achieved by explicitly registering a PropertySourcesPlaceholderConfigurer via a static #Bean method. Note, however, that explicit registration of a PropertySourcesPlaceholderConfigurer via a static #Bean method is typically only required if you need to customize configuration such as the placeholder syntax, etc. See the "Working with externalized values" section of #Configuration's javadocs and "a note on BeanFactoryPostProcessor-returning #Bean methods" of #Bean's javadocs for details and examples.
You should try to add annotation #PropertySource into the your config class.
#Configuration
#PropertySource("classpath:my.properties")
public class MainConfig implements WebMvcConfigurer {}
and then try to access your property in SecurityConfig class
To get full information see official docs
I hope it will help you
This works for me.
I guess you have another class that triggers the application and that is annotated with #SpringBootApplication
Also, your methods mySpecialBean do not return a MySpecialBean instance, so this probably does not even compile.
Is there any other class that you are using? Please advice
Finally got it!
The problem was related with some dependency priorities and unnecessary beans declarations. Getting into details, I'm working with OAuht2 and I started with this tutorial. In the end I've made a mix with this one too (more recent). The problem was related with these #Bean's that don't really need to be declared as beans:
ClientRegistrationRepository
ClientRegistration
OAuth2AuthorizedClientService
Spring was calling these beans before any other configuration, so any properties was not loaded yet. Maybe changing the priority, dependence or even the order would resolve the issue, but as I was analysing the code I found that these methods are only used on security configuration and not really needed along any other part of the app. So I removed the #Bean declaration and all works nice now! At the time these methods are called inside security config the properties are already loaded.
Hope to help someone out there.
I have an application using Spring Integration where I have multiple handlers (strategies) for some service gateway methods, and I want the deployment launcher to be able to select which specific handlers are loaded. Since component scanning will pick up all of the handlers indiscriminately, I prefer to explicitly declare JavaConfig #Beans for them.
This works fine for the service objects themselves, but I can't find a way to load the service interface itself in Java without #IntegrationComponentScan. My current workaround is to include a "one-liner" XML file with an <int-gateway> tag and #ImportResource it, but I'd really prefer a more direct solution.
Is there any straightforward way in JavaConfig to tell Spring Integration to create a proxy service interface for a specific class?
GatewayProxyFactoryBean is for you.
This class is used to populate bean definition from <int:gateway> tag and from MessagingGateway annotation.
So, you can do like this:
#Bean
public GatewayProxyFactoryBean myGateway() {
GatewayProxyFactoryBean factoryBean = new GatewayProxyFactoryBean(YourServiceInterface.class);
factoryBean.setDefaultRequestChannel(gatewayRequestChannel());
return factoryBean;
}