Is there a Java EE 6 / 7 equivalent annotation for Spring's #Configuration?
If the answer is yes then are the equivalents for its surrounding annotations, such as #ComponentScan and #EnableWebMvc?
I did, of course, look for it in Java EE 6 / 7 (I admit I skipped a paragraph here and there), in javadocs (specifically among annotations), in Spring doc, tutorials, blogs, SO and Google.
JEE CDI has also an annotation of creating bean programmatically and exposing them, so it offers bean factories, called producers:
https://dzone.com/articles/cdi-and-the-produces-annotation-for-factory
CDI offers Producer methods (annotated with #Produces) which is the equivalent of #Bean in spring. You can than implement Producers classes that are beans which contain a bunch of producer methods. However, this is by far not as powerful as a spring configuration since as far as I am aware of, there is no possibity to e.g. "import" other configurations (producer classes).
This makes it especially difficult to test CDI applications.
You can either
heavily use mocks to test a single CDI bean to totally avoid injected objects
blow up your test class just to create the instance under test with all dependencies
use testing frameworks like CDI-Unit that creates the beans for you
With 1. Test Driven Development becomes almost impossible and tests have always to be adapted when implementation changes, even if the contract does not change.
With 2. you end up in a lot compiler errors in tests as soon as dependencies between your Beans change
With 3. you need to point your testing framework to the implementation of your beans. Since there exists no Configuration that knows about all beans, the test needs to know about it. Again, if things change your tests will break.
I admit... I don't like CDI ;-P
The javax.servlet.annotation package defines a number of annotations to be used to register Servlet, Filter, and Listener classes as well as do some other configuration, for example, security.
You can also use the ServletContainerInitializer class to configure your ServletContext through Java instead of through the XML deployment descriptor. Spring provides its own implementation of ServletContainerInitializer in which case all you have to do is create a class that implements WebApplicationInitializer and does servlet, filter, and listener registration and leave that class on the classpath.
Examples abound in the javadoc.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Why is my Spring #Autowired field null?
(21 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
In order to provide POJOs in my legacy web app (Tomcat 8.0.26) with the ability to send ActiveMQ messages I've taken the recommendation to introduce Camel (2.15.2) / Spring (4.2.1) into the app to purely for the purpose of managing pooled MQ connections. I'm hoping there isn't an easier way.
Doing things the Spring way I'm thinking everything would need to be based around an MVC architecture with HTTP servlet aware controllers having access to the servlet context and therefore the Spring context in order to inject beanFactory beans into classes annotated with #Controller and #Service (and in fact there must be a Spring #Controller class that enables Spring to inject the #Service class.
However, as I've stated this is legacy code that will not be using the spring web framework.
After much pain it seems that the only way I can get beanFactory beans injected into my POJOs is to go the AspectJ and Weaving route. Before I go down this road can someone tell me that this is currently the best approach (what I've read describing this solution is from 2011 Can't get Spring to inject my dependencies - Spring Newbie) ? Can you point me to documentation and a working example?
Many thanks.
1) aspectj with #Configurable
In your #Configuration annotated class/es
you can add some more annotations
#Configuration
#EnableLoadTimeWeaving(aspectjWeaving = EnableLoadTimeWeaving.AspectJWeaving.ENABLED)
#EnableSpringConfigured
#EnableAspectJAutoProxy
to enable aspectj and the #Configurable annotation,
you need to import the aspectj lib to your project and add the spring tomcat instrumentable java agent in your tomcat lib folder (give a look here, it exaplains how to configure tomcat) http://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/docs/2.5.6/api/org/springframework/instrument/classloading/tomcat/TomcatInstrumentableClassLoader.html
this is not going to help you if you are going to create your pojos using "new"
MyPojo p = new MyPojo(); // no black magic for this, you will need to satisfies the dependencies yourself) but that would be helpful for example when you load some entities through a framework like hibernate and you want to inject something into them.. #Configurable it's an option that can be evaluated in those cases, for what you describe I would rather not use it.
2) You can have some static methods that uses some static set spring-beans and use them from your pojos, something like
class Util{
private static SprintBeanWithJmsSupport x;
public static setSpringBeanToHandleJmsMessages(SprintBeanWithJmsSupport x){
Util.x = x;
}
public static sendJmsMessage(JmsMessage m){
x.sendMessage(m)
}
}
and you can go with Util.sendJmsMessage(...)
this is a bit shitty but it does the work, I don't personally like this approach
3) set your spring beans in your pojo when they need to use them (maybe behind some nice interfaces that suit your domain)
if you go with spring mvc you will likely end up having some controllers that will use some services (generally they handle security / db access and are the entry point to start the "use cases"), as everything wthin these layers is handled by spring it will be very simple to pass the spring-bean to handle jms messaging to your pojos, this seems to me quite a nice way to handle the problem
I went mostly based on memory and something may not be completely accurate, plus my english is .. what it is, so hope this can be helpful anyway.
Hy,
Reading a lot about Spring AOP vs AspectJ, I still have some doubts:
1.)When using Spring AOP with classes annotated with #Aspect and using "aop:aspectj-autoproxy" tag , it can be said that we are using just the annotations of aspectj or besides that it is being used AspectJ too for the weaving?
2) Its said that AspectJ has better performance because the weaving is in compilation time, it means that the target class files are physically changed inserting the aspects in them? is it not a bit aggressive?
3)It said that Spring uses proxys for AOP, so, I undertand that when you get a bean from Spring, Spring builds a proxy in memory that has already inserted the aspects in it, right?
So why is it said that when a method from your proxy bean calls other method in the proxy, the last method will not have aspects?
Thanks
1) using aspectj-autoproxy means that #Aspectannotations are recognized, but Spring proxies are still being created, see this quote from the documentation:
Do not be misled by the name of the element:
using it will result in the creation of Spring AOP proxies. The
#AspectJ style of aspect declaration is just being used here, but the
AspectJ runtime is not involved.
2) AspectJ supports load time weaving, byte code weaving and compile time weaving. There should no difference in performance, it's just a different point in time to weave the aspect in (compilation, third party jars available, class load time), see this answer for further details.
It is actually more transparent once it's set up to have the aspects weaved at these moments, with runtime proxies there are problems when a bean calls itself using this.someMethod, the aspects don't get applied because the proxies get bypassed (#Transactional/#Secured does not work, etc.).
3) Have a look at this picture from the documentation:
With runtime proxies (non AspectJ), Spring leaves the bean class untouched. What it does is it creates a proxy that either implements the same interface as the bean (JDK proxy), or if the bean implements no interface then it dynamically creates a proxy class with CGLIB (subclass of bean).
But in both cases a proxy is created that delegates the calls to the actual bean instance. So when the bean call this.methodB() from methodA, the proxy is bypassed because the call is made directly on the bean and not on the proxy.
Spring AOP can be configured with AspectJ-sytle, ie annotations are parsed to build configuration but AspectJ compiler is not used for weaving. Only a subset of AspectJ annotations and poincut definitions can be used with Spring AOP.
Maybe, but I don't know any class that has complained. However, is possible that some classes don't allow re-weaving when modified by other bytecode tools.
Inner calls are not proxied because they call on this.method() (with this = the target bean begin proxied) and not on proxy.method() so the proxy has no chances to intercept the call. However, Spring AOP proxies usually notices when a target method return this and return itself instead, so calls like builder.withColor(Color.RED).withHat(Hat.Cowboy) will work. Note that in Spring AOP there are always two classes involved: the proxy and the target.
I have two maven projects say MvnSpring and MvnGuice.MvnSpring is working on spring and hibernate frame works.
And MvnGuice is working on google guice and mybatis. I need to combine both the features together.
Both are following singleton pattern. I need to get some class of MvnSpring in MvnGuice while coding. So that I created a jar of MvnSpring and put it in .m2 repository and give the dependacy details in MvnGuice. Now I can import classes of MvnSpring in MvnGuice classes.MvnSpring uses spring dependency injection and MvnGuice uses guice dependency injection for object creation. Now in MvnSpring flow is MSserviceImpl(implements MSservice) > MSdaoImpl(implements MSdao). Now I need to call MSService class from MvnGuice. Then at run time it shows error like MSService class is null. Then I made a guice dependency injection for MSService class in MvnGuice. Now the control reaches MSserviceImpl but now MSdao is null at here. Is it possible to start MvnSpring along with MvnGuice. I hope then I can solve the issue.
While Spring and Guice are targeted at the same problem, IoC, they take very different approaches to solve it. They differ both in functionality and in how they are configured, where Spring has bean definitions and Guice uses bindings.
Fortunately they do have common grounds in that they both support JSR-330, a standards specification that defines a set of annotations. This enables you to write your singletons and describe the injections that they need without depending on either Spring or Guice.
This way you can share your singletons between projects irregardless of the framework you use in a particular project. I would not recommend using both Guice and Spring in the same project, except if there's a clearly defined separation between them. For instance you might use Guice for a module that is used by Spring code via a defined API that hides the fact that it internally is based on Guice.
There was already mentioned JSR-330.
For some cases it can be not enough, e.g., you have code:
final String className = config.getProperty(«serviceImpl»);
// Class.forName(name) and check required interface for type safety
final Class<? extends Service> serviceClass = Reflection.classForName(className, Service.class);
final Service service = injector.getInstance(serviceClass);
In different DI environments you are supposed to support both com.guice.inject.Injector.getInstance() and org.springframework.context.ApplicationContext.getBean() implementations.
There is the draft solution sdif4j Simple Dependency Injection Facade.
The idea of this project is to encapsulate different DI frameworks logic with own abstraction to extend default JSR-330 possibilities. Note, there is no public releases yet, but you can find ideas how to solve your problem or make an internal release in a fork.
The general issue, is that your both MvnSpring and MvnGuice projects are supposed to be based on JSR-330 (instead of guice/spring annotations) and org.sdif4j:sdif4j-api (or your own abstraction; only if Injector functionality is required). It is recommended to make guice and spring dependencies optional (to compile but not export) to allow the library clients to choose the DI themselves.
In your MvnCompineGuiceAndSpring you just declare sdif4j-guice or sdif4j-spring dependency (it is similar to slf4j usage) and configure your DI environment. You can find different examples in testing subproject.
Some more notes:
Spring default scope is singleton, Guice - prototype (Spring terminology). So, if you want a prototype bean, you can use:
#org.springframework.context.annotation.Scope("prototype")
#javax.inject.Named
public class TestPrototype {
}
The Spring #Scope annotation should be ignored by guice even if spring does not present in your classpath.
Also you have to declare all your Singleton beans with #javax.inject.Named and #javax.inject.Singleton annotation to support both Spring and Guice, like this:
#javax.inject.Named
#javax.inject.Singleton
public class TestSingleton implements ITestSingleton {
public TestSingleton() {
}
}
As with #Scope annotation, you can use #ImplementedBy(#ProvidedBy) guice annotations on your code (when feasible; be careful with it, in general it is not a good practice), that should be also ignored in Spring DI (in both cases if Spring exists in classpath or not).
Hope, that's clear.
I would like to achieve this idealism :
To have only 1 implementation for the JSF Bean container, like to use only Spring or Weld but not both. Currently i am using Spring for my backend, so i prefer Spring.
To have only 1 annotation, to choose between #ManagedBean, #Named, #Model
To be able to use all supported scopes, like #RequestScoped, #SessionScoped, #ViewScoped, #FlashScoped, maybe also #ConversationScoped
The JSF Beans could be injected with spring-managed-services (The backend services), perhaps using #Inject or #Autowired
So far i've been finding no best combination to achieve these because as far as i know, please correct me if i am wrong, :
#ManagedBean can not be injected with spring services ?
#Named can be injected with spring services using #Inject, but #Named is using Weld. Can i just use spring to managed the #Named instead of Weld ?
#Named doesnt support #ViewScoped and FlashScope ?
Please share your thoughts and experiences.
Thank you :-)
UPDATE 15 March 2011
Found an interesting page that describes how to replace Jboss Weld with Spring as the JSR 299 CDI implementation. So basically, the question number 2 is answered. Number 1 is also answered indirectly since i can now inject spring services.
But still, the number 3 question remains. I would find very helpful if i can use the #ViewScoped and Flash Scope in the #Named, something like this article. Flash scope implementation has yet to be seen, but the closest one i can get so far is this page.
Hopefully, replacing weld with spring as the jsr 299 implementation will still enable me to use #ConversationScoped.
Gotta test things now, wish me luck :-)
UPDATE 18 MARCH 2011
Successfully make use of Spring 3 instead of weld to do the #Named, #Inject. The important thing is to set the el-resolver in the faces-config.xml.
AFAIK, Spring 3 currently doesnt support CDI yet, so bye2 #ConversationScoped.
For the scoping, i must still use #Scope("request") or #Scope("session"), but if i prefer the #RequestScoped (javax.enterprise.context.RequestScoped) and #SessionScoped, i can make use of the bridge provided from this article.
The Scope("view") for spring from this article works like magic :-)
One problem remain though, how to pass objects between Scope("view")-beans ..
Wish me luck !
update
Ahhh .. finally done ..
Passing the variables using Flash provided by JSF2 really works like magic.
I dont need an 3rd party implementation for that.
So basically, i can do without weld, but with spring, with the common scopes available, including the view scope, dan can pass between beans using the flash object.
One thing missing is the conversation scope, which isnt a major problem to me yet.
Hopefully the future spring can support this conversation scope.
Cheers :-)
I can successfully Inject Spring bean using ManagedProperty annotation like below. This is on JSF Managed Bean. Spring bean is for backend and I prefer spring for backend.
#ManagedProperty(name="userRepository", value="#{userRepository}")
private UserRepository userRepository;
//Setter and/or Getter
value is the most important thing here. It's actually the bean name of spring. I hope this helps.
Weld (actually, the reference implementation of JSR-299 Context and Dependency Injection, also known as Java EE 6 CDI) was less or more invented to supplant Spring in Java EE 6 environments. I would suggest to use Java EE 6 CDI instead of Spring. Why would you use a 3rd party framework when Java EE 6 provides the same functionality out the box?
If the Spring backend really cannot be changed, then I'd suggest to stick to it and not to intermix with Java EE 6 CDI annotations to save yourself from confusions and maintenance headache.
I'm working on an Spring application which has a large number of beans - in the hundreds - and it's getting quite cumbersome to use and document.
I'm interested in any experience you have with DI-enabled apps with a large number of beans which would aid maintainability, documentation and general usage.
Although the application is Spring-based with a couple of context files, I'm open to listening about suggestions regarding any DI container and about DI in general as well.
You can use component scan and autowiring features to dramatically decrease the amount of Spring XML configuration.
Example:
<beans>
<!-- Scans service package looking for #Service annotated beans -->
<context:component-scan base-package="my.root.package.service"/>
</beans>
Your service classes must be annotated in order to be automatically scanned:
package my.root.package.service;
#Service("fooService")
public class FooServiceImpl implements FooService{
}
You can also use the #Autowired annotation to tell Spring how to inject the bean dependencies:
package my.root.package.service;
#Service("barService")
public class BarServiceImpl implements BarService{
//Foo service injected by Spring
#Autowired
private FooService fooService;
//...
}
I found the following to be of use:
split your Spring configurations into multiple standalone configurations, and use Spring's import facility to import configuration dependencies (see here, section 3.2.2.1). That way you have a set of configurations that you can combine or disassemble as required, and they are all self-dependent (all the dependencies will be explicit and referenced)
Use an IDE that is Spring-aware, and allows you to navigate through the configurations via point-n-click on beans (references/names, to-and-from source code). Intellij works very well at this (version 7 and beyond, I think). I suspect Eclipse would do something similar.
Revise what you're injecting where. You may want to refactor multiple bean injections into one composite or 'meta' bean, or a larger component. Or you may find that components you once thought you'd need to inject have never changed, or never demanded that injectability (for testing, implementing as strategies etc.)
I used to work with a huge Spring installation, with hundreds (thousands?) of beans. Splitting the configurations up made life a lot more manageable, and simplified testing/creating standalone processes etc. But I think the Intellij Spring integration that came with Intellij made the most difference. Having a Spring-aware IDE is a major timesaver.
As #Wilson Freitas says, use autowiring. I daily work with a system that has few thousand spring managed beans using mostly autowired. But I think the notion of "retaining the overall picture" is slightly misplaced. As a system grows you can't expect to do that in the same way as you did on a smaller system. Using #Autowiring forces you to use stronger typing than xml-based spring, which again means you can use the dependency tracking features of your IDE to navigate in dependencies.
I really think it's suboptimal to think that you need to understand too much of the "full" picture when it comes to the spring configuration. You should be focusing on your code and it's dependencies. Managebility and maintainability are achieved by organizing this code well, naming things well and managing your coupling; all of the stuff that applies even if you're not using spring. Spring shouldn't change much, and with the approval of JSR-330, it may even seem like dependency injection will creep further "under the hood" of the runtime environment.
Our strategy is:
naming conventions, e.g.: fooService, fooDao, fooController;
property setters following these conventions;
autowiring by name (autowire="byName"); we had many problems with autowiring by type, especially on the controller layer