Using Spring Data and Java JPA, I would like to store comment threads in a MYSQL table. The comments are on some chunk of data, and every comment can have any number of child comments (think Reddit). I was wondering if this Java class makes sense to fulfill my needs.
#Entity
public class Comment extends Identified {
// Comment data
#Column(nullable=false)
private String data;
// Parent comment
#ManyToOne(fetch=FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(nullable=true)
private Comment parent;
// Sub comments
#OneToMany(fetch=FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinColumn(nullable=true, mappedBy="parent")
private Set<Comment> children;
public Comment() { }
....
To clarify, my main concern regards having both a ManyToOne and OneToMany relationship to the same class. It seems ugly, but also like the only way to express this relationship.
I assure you that your mapping is completely normal, I would even say usual. The two relationships (many-to-one and one-to-many) are realized in DB using different concepts and do not collide. As the relationship is bidirectional, both mappings represent different ends of two different links (one is relation to parent, another is relation to child).
Related
My schema will be something similar to the above picture.
I am planning to use Spring data JDBC and found that
If multiple aggregates reference the same entity, that entity can’t be part of those aggregates referencing it since it only can be part of exactly one aggregate.
Following are my questions:
How to create two different aggregates for the above without changing the DB design?
How to retrieve the Order / Vendor list alone? i.e. I don't want to traverse through the aggregate root.
How to create two different aggregates for the above without changing the DB design?
I think you simply have three Aggregates here: Order, Vendor and ProductType. A mental test that I always use is:
If A has a reference to B and I delete an A, should I automatically and without exception delete all Bs referenced by that A? If so B is part of the A Aggregate.
This doesn't seem to be true for any of the relationships in your diagram, so let's go with separate Aggregates for each entity.
This in turn makes each reference in the diagram one between different Aggregates.
As described in "Spring Data JDBC, References, and Aggregates" these must be modelled as ids in your Java code, not as Java references.
class Order {
#Id
Long orderid;
String name;
String description;
Instance created;
Long productTypeId;
}
class Vendor {
#Id
Long vid;
String name;
String description;
Instance created;
Long productTypeId;
}
class ProductType {
#Id
Long pid;
String name;
String description;
Instance created;
}
Since they are separate Aggregates each gets it's own Repository.
interface Orders extends CrudRepository<Order, Long>{
}
interface Vendors extends CrudRepository<Vendor, Long>{}
interface ProductTypes extends CrudRepository<ProductType, Long>{}
At this point I think we fulfilled your requirements. You might have to add some #Column and #Table annotations to get the exact names you want or provide a NamingStrategy.
You probably also want some kind of caching for the product types since I'd expect they see lots of reads with only few writes.
And of course you can add additional methods to the repositories, for example:
interface Orders extends CrudRepository<Order, Long>{
List<Orders> findByProductTypeId(Long productTypeId);
}
I have an entity like below. When I need to list comment size of company I'm calling totalComments() method. For this does hibernate go to the database and fetch entire comment data or just querying with count(*)? If hibernate fetch entire comment what is the efficient way for getting comment size?
#Entity
#Table(name = "companies")
public class Company extends ItemEntity {
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinTable(name="companies_comments",
joinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="company_id"),
inverseJoinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="comment_id"))
private Set<Comment> comments = new HashSet<>();
public void addComment(Comment comment) {
this.comments.add(comment);
}
public int totalComments() {
return this.comments.size();
}
}
You should drop the own method counter and create a specific (business) query to retrieve the size of the list, such as
public long getCommentsCount(Company c) {
String query = "SELECT COUNT(cm) FROM Company AS c JOIN c.comments AS cm WHERE c = :company";
return entityManager.createQuery(q, Long.class).setParameter("company", c).getSingleResult();
}
Some persistence provider may optimize performance when this kind of query is loaded as a #NamedQuery on entity, or when using CriteriaQuery API.
Depending on your database, you may need to change the return class to Number.class and convert to long.
If you want to tune even more your performance, use createNativeQuery method and write your own pure SQL, but keep in mind that changes on db schema requires to review theses queries.
I found the answer. If we don't adjust for getting collection size of entity hibernate loads every comment. We can solve this performance issue in two ways.
We can use #LazyCollection(LazyCollectionOption.EXTRA) like below. By LazyCollectionOption.EXTRA .size() and .contains() won't initialize the whole collection.
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#LazyCollection(LazyCollectionOption.EXTRA)
#JoinTable(name="companies_comments",
joinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="company_id"),
inverseJoinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="comment_id"))
private Set<Comment> comments = new HashSet<>();
Or we can use #Formula annotation.
#Formula(SELECT COUNT(*) FROM companies_comments cc WHERE cc.company_id = id)
private int numberOfComments;
Edit after 8 months: For simplicity and performance perspective, we should create a JPA Query Method like below.
#Repository
public interface CommentRepository extends JpaRepository<Comment, Long> {
int countAllByCompany(Company company);
}
We should never use getComments().size() for this purpose, because this way all comments are loaded into memory and this may be cause performance issues.
It is also true when adding comments to the collection. We shouldn't use getComments().add(newComment). When we have OneToMany relation, all we have to do is set the company field of the comment like as newComment.setCompany(company), and perform the persist operation. Therefore, it is recommended to define OneToMany relationships bidirectional.
I'm quite new to Spring Data JPA technology and currently facing one task I can't deal with. I am seeking best practice for such cases.
In my Postgres database I have a two tables connected with one-to-many relation. Table 'account' has a field 'type_id' which is foreign key references to field 'id' of table 'account_type':
So the 'account_type' table only plays a role of dictionary. Accordingly to that I've created to JPA entities (Kotlin code):
#Entity
class Account(
#Id #GeneratedValue var id: Long? = null,
var amount: Int,
#ManyToOne var accountType: AccountType
)
#Entity
class AccountType(
#Id #GeneratedValue var id: Long? = null,
var type: String
)
In my Spring Boot application I'd like to have a RestConroller which will be responsible for giving all accounts in JSON format. To do that I made entities classes serializable and wrote a simple restcontroller:
#GetMapping("/getAllAccounts", produces = [APPLICATION_JSON_VALUE])
fun getAccountsData(): String {
val accountsList = accountRepository.findAll().toMutableList()
return json.stringify(Account.serializer().list, accountsList)
}
where accountRepository is just an interface which extends CrudRepository<Account, Long>.
And now if I go to :8080/getAllAccounts, I'll get the Json of the following format (sorry for formatting):
[
{"id":1,
"amount":0,
"accountType":{
"id":1,
"type":"DBT"
}
},
{"id":2,
"amount":0,
"accountType":{
"id":2,
"type":"CRD"
}
}
]
But what I really want from that controller is just
[
{"id":1,
"amount":0,
"type":"DBT"
},
{"id":2,
"amount":0,
"type":"CRD"
}
]
Of course I can create new serializable class for accounts which will have String field instead of AccountType field and can map JPA Account class to that class extracting account type string from AccountType field. But for me it looks like unnecessary overhead and I believe that there could be a better pattern for such cases.
For example what I have in my head is that probably somehow I can create one JPA entity class (with String field representing account type) which will be based on two database tables and unnecessary complexity of having inner object will be reduced automagically each time I call repository methods :) Moreover I will be able to use this entity class in my business logic without any additional 'wrappers'.
P.s. I read about #SecondaryTable annotation but it looks like it can only work in cases where there is one-to-one relation between two tables which is not my case.
There are a couple of options whic allow clean separation without a DTO.
Firstly, you could look at using a projection which is kind of like a DTO mentioned in other answers but without many of the drawbacks:
https://docs.spring.io/spring-data/jpa/docs/current/reference/html/#projections
#Projection(
name = "accountSummary",
types = { Account.class })
public Interface AccountSummaryProjection{
Long getId();
Integer getAmount();
#Value("#{target.accountType.type}")
String getType();
}
You then simply need to update your controller to call either query method with a List return type or write a method which takes a the proection class as an arg.
https://docs.spring.io/spring-data/jpa/docs/current/reference/html/#projection.dynamic
#GetMapping("/getAllAccounts", produces = [APPLICATION_JSON_VALUE])
#ResponseBody
fun getAccountsData(): List<AccountSummaryProjection>{
return accountRepository.findAllAsSummary();
}
An alternative approach is to use the Jackson annotations. I note in your question you are manually tranforming the result to a JSON String and returning a String from your controller. You don't need to do that if the Jackson Json library is on the classpath. See my controller above.
So if you leave the serialization to Jackson you can separate the view from the entity using a couple of annotations. Note that I would apply these using a Jackson mixin rather than having to pollute the Entity model with Json processing instructions however you can look that up:
#Entity
class Account(
//in real life I would apply these using a Jacksin mix
//to prevent polluting the domain model with view concerns.
#JsonDeserializer(converter = StringToAccountTypeConverter.class)
#JsonSerializer(converter = AccountTypeToStringConverter.class
#Id #GeneratedValue var id: Long? = null,
var amount: Int,
#ManyToOne var accountType: AccountType
)
You then simply create the necessary converters:
public class StringToAccountTypeConverter extends StdConverter<String, CountryType>
implements org.springframework.core.convert.converter.Converter<String, AccountType> {
#Autowired
private AccountTypeRepository repo;
#Override
public AccountType convert(String value) {
//look up in repo and return
}
}
and vice versa:
public class AccountTypeToStringConverter extends StdConverter<String, CountryType>
implements org.springframework.core.convert.converter.Converter<AccountType, String> {
#Override
public String convert(AccountType value) {
return value.getName();
}
}
One of the least complicated ways to achieve what you are aiming for - from the external clients' point of view, at least - has to do with custom serialisation, what you seem to be aware of and what #YoManTaMero has extended upon.
Obtaining the desired class structure might not be possible. The closest I've managed to find is related to the #SecondaryTable annotation but the caveat is this only works for #OneToOne relationships.
In general, I'd pinpoint your problem to the issue of DTOs and Entities. The idea behind JPA is to map the schema and content of your database to code in an accessible but accurate way. It takes away the heavy-lifting of managing SQL queries, but it is designed mostly to reflect your DB's structure, not to map it to a different set of domains.
If the organisation of your DB schema does not exactly match the needs of your system's I/O communication, this might be a sign that:
Your DB has not been designed correctly;
Your DB is fine, but the manageable entities (tables) in it simply do not match directly to the business entities (models) in your external communication.
Should second be the case, Entities should be mapped to DTOs which can then be passed around. Single Entity may map to a few different DTOs. Single DTO might take more than one (related!) entities to be created. This is a good practice for medium-to-large systems in the first place - handing out references to the object that's the direct access point to your database is a risk.
Mind that simply because the id of the accountType is not taking part in your external communication does not mean it will never be a part of your business logic.
To sum up: JPA is designed with ease of database access in mind, not for smoothing out external communication. For that, other tools - such as e.g. Jackson serializer - are used, or certain design patterns - like DTO - are being employed.
One approach to solve this is to #JsonIgnore accountType and create getType method like
#JsonProperty("type")
var getType() {
return accountType.getType();
}
In our Restful application we decided to use DTO's to shield the Hibernate domain model for several reasons.
We map Hibernate entities to DTO and vice versa manually using DTOMappers in the Service Layer.
Example in Service Layer:
#Transactional(readOnly=true)
public PersonDTO findPersonWithInvoicesById(Long id) {
Person person = personRepository.findById(id);
return PersonMapperDTOFactory.getInstance().toDTO(person);
}
The main concept could be explained like this:
JSON (Jackson parser) <-> Controller <-> Service Layer (uses Mapping Layer) <-> Repository
We agreed that we retrieve associations by performing a HQL (or Criteria) using a left join.
This is mostly a performant way to retrieve relations and avoids the N+1 select issue.
However, it's still possible to have the N+1 select issue when a developer mistakenly forgets to do a left join. The relations will still be fetched because the PersonDTOMapper will iterate over the Invoices of a Person for converting to InvoiceDTOs. So the data is still fetched because the DTOMapper is executed where a Hibernate Session is active (managed by Spring)
Is there some way to make the Hibernate Session 'not active' in our DTOMappers? We would face a LazyInitializationException that should trigger the developer that he didn't fetch some data like it should.
I've read about #Transactional(propagation = Propagation.NOT_SUPPORTED) that suspends the transaction. However, I don't know that it was intended for such purposes.
What is a clean solution to achieve this? Alternatives are also very welcome!
Usually I use the mapper in the controller layer. From my prspective, the service layer manages the application business logic, dtos are very useful if you want to rapresent data to the external world in a different way. In this way you may get the lazy inizitalization excpetion you are looking for.
I have one more reason to prefer this solution: just image you need to invoke a public method inside a public method in the service class: in this case you might need to call the mapper several times.
If you are using Hibernate, then there are specific ways that you can determine if an associated object has been lazy-loaded.
For example, let's say you have an entity class Foo that contains a #ManyToOne 'foreign' association to entity class Bar which is represented by a field in Foo called bar.
In you DTO mapping code you can check if the associated bar has been lazy-loaded using the following code:
if (!(bar instanceof HibernateProxy) ||
!((HibernateProxy)bar).getHibernateLazyInitializer().isUninitialized()) {
// bar has already been lazy-loaded, so we can
// recursively load a BarDTO for the associated Bar object
}
The simplest solution to achieve what you desire is to clear the entity manager after querying and before invoking the DTO mapper. That way, the object will be detached and access to uninitialized assocations will trigger a LazyInitializationException instead.
I felt your pain as well which drove me to developing Blaze-Persistence Entity Views which allows you to define DTOs as interfaces and map to the entity model, using the attribute name as default mapping, which allows very simple looking mappings.
Here a little example
#Entity
class Person {
#Id Long id;
String name;
String lastName;
String address;
String city;
String zipCode;
}
#EntityView(Person.class)
interface PersonDTO {
#IdMapping Long getId();
String getName();
}
Querying would be as simple as
#Transactional(readOnly=true)
public PersonDTO findPersonWithInvoicesById(Long id) {
return personRepository.findById(id);
}
interface PersonRepository extends EntityViewRepository<PersonDTO, Long> {
PersonDTO findById(Long id);
}
Since you seem to be using Spring data, you will enjoy the spring data integration.
I am trying to relate two tables with spring / hibernate in MYSQL like this
#Table (name = candidatresumeinfo)
public class CandidateResumeInfo implements Serializable
{
List<SelectedResumes> selectedResumes;
.............
..............
#JoinColumn(name = "selectedresumeid")
#OneToMany
public List<SelectedResumes> getSelectedResumes() {
return selectedResumes;
}
public void setSelectedResumes(List<SelectedResumes> selectedResumes) {
this.selectedResumes = selectedResumes;
}
Now ,i got the data in my list correctly( i checked in debug)but the call from server is getting failed which is saying cause:Nullpointer exception .
thanks
You can use OneToMany annotation only on Collections, so you should change the field to Set or List, because hibernate will return multiple result if you use OneToMany. I think you'd like to use ManyToOne annotation here.
ManyToOne means here that you have multiple CandidateResumeInfo for one SelectedResumes.
OneToMany means here that you have multiple SelectedResumes for one CandidateResumeInfo.
This annotation naming can be a bit strange for first time. Hope I helped.
Answer for your comment:
The best way is you declare the relationship both side.
Here is the example:
CandidateResumeInfo.java:
#OneToMany(mappedBy="candidateResumeInfo")
List<SelectedResumes> selectedResumes;
SelectedResumes.java:
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name="candidate_resume_info_id")
CandidateResumeInfo candidateResumeInfo;