Im using Jersey Rest and want a Jersey filter to have access to some spring beans.
however as I've discovered from other threads, Jersey does not obtain Spring beans if they are Java proxies as opposed to generated java proxies. I want to add the proxy-target-class="true"
What are the impacts of doing so and also can this just be set on a single bean or does it need to be set on all referenced beans?
By setting proxy-target-class="true" you will be using CGLIB2 for your proxies, instead of jdk proxys.
The implications are the following, as described in the documentation:
final methods cannot be advised, as they cannot be overriden.
You will need the CGLIB 2 binaries on your classpath, whereas dynamic proxies are available with the JDK. Spring will automatically
warn you when it needs CGLIB and the CGLIB library classes are not
found on the classpath.
The constructor of your proxied object will be called twice. This is a natural consequence of the CGLIB proxy model whereby a subclass
is generated for each proxied object. For each proxied instance, two
objects are created: the actual proxied object and an instance of the
subclass that implements the advice. This behavior is not exhibited
when using JDK proxies. Usually, calling the constructor of the
proxied type twice, is not an issue, as there are usually only
assignments taking place and no real logic is implemented in the
constructor.
Also, you should be able to make a "target-proxy" for a specific component by using
proxyMode=ScopedProxyMode.TARGET_CLASS
Forcing a CGLib-Proxy although the controller formally implements an interface (SpringBoot 1.2.3.RELEASE with Spring 4.1.6.RELEASE):
#Controller
#Scope( proxyMode = ScopedProxyMode.TARGET_CLASS )
public class ServiceImpl implements ServiceIntf
{ .... }
This enables valid and working #RequestMapping and #Transactional annotations
Use the following annotation in Java Spring Config class:
#EnableAspectJAutoProxy(proxyTargetClass = true)
This is the way I made my test working:
MyTarget target = new MyTarget();
AspectJProxyFactory factory = new AspectJProxyFactory(target);
factory.setProxyTargetClass(true);
Related
I have a simple Quarkus resource:
#Path("/rosters")
#Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
#Consumes(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
public class RosterResource {
private final RosterService rosterService;
public RosterResource(RosterService rosterService){
this.rosterService = rosterService;
}
#GET
#Path("/{rosterId}")
public Response getRoster(#PathParam("rosterId")Long rosterId){
return Response.ok(rosterService.getRosterById(rosterId)).build();
}
}
I am trying to inject the RosterServiceinstance in my resource, but I am getting a javax.enterprise.inject.UnsatisfiedResolutionException. However, if I use the #ApplicationScoped annotation on RosterService, then everything works just fine. Is there a way of injecting the RosterService class in my resource without using annotations? In other words, is there a way of making RosterService discoverable by the Quarkus container without directly annotating the class?
Edit: looking into the CDI docs, it seems that you can manually register beans using a method with a #BuildStep annotation. However, it is not clear to me which class should contain the annotated method)
Another option would be to use a Jandex index
To the best of my knowledge, Quarkus only implements so called annotated bean discovery. That means that all CDI beans in Quarkus have to have a bean defining annotation. #ApplicationScoped is one of them.
EDIT: regarding a Jandex index, that allows you to scan for beans in additional JARs. In other words, it will only expand the set of classes that are scanned for a bean defining annotation.
When it comes to a #BuildStep method -- that is only possible in a Quarkus extension. Extensions are powerful (and indeed they can define additional beans) but also complex. You can start at https://quarkus.io/guides/building-my-first-extension, but it may feel overwhelming. It may also feel like this is not the right thing to do if you want to just make your class a bean -- and that would be true. But if your class comes from an external library that you can't change, extension makes sense.
Is there a specific reason why you don't want to annotate your service class with #ApplicationScoped (or any other of the bean discover/scope annotations)?
The only other way that I'm aware of (instead of annotations) is - as you yourself mentioned - the use of Jandex index.
I seems have problem understanding these 2 annotation. I have try to read the javadocs but still cannot figure out. Can anyone help to explain with simple code about these 2 ?
Thank so much in advance.
You use #Configuration as a replacement to the XML based configuration for configuring spring beans. So instead of an xml file we write a class and annotate that with #Configuration and define the beans in it using #Bean annotation on the methods.
And finally you use AnnotationConfigApplicationContext to register this #Configuration class and thus spring manages the beans defined. Small example you can find at Spring Configuration Documentaion.
Quoting from the above link
It is just another way of configuration Indicates that a class declares
one or more #Bean methods and may be processed by the Spring container
to generate bean definitions and service requests for those beans at
runtime.
And #Configurable is an annotation that injects dependencies into objects that are not managed by Spring using aspectj libraries. i.e., you still use old way of instantiation with plain new operator to create objects but the spring will take care of injecting the dependencies into that object automatically for you.
#Configuration is the heart of the Java-based configuration mechanism and provides an alternative to XML-based configuration.
#Configuration classes are just like regular #Components classes, except that methods annotated with #Bean are used to factory beans.
This question is regarding the sample:
https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/blob/master/spring-boot-samples/spring-boot-sample-jersey/src/main/java/sample/jersey/Endpoint.java
Why do we need "#Component" annotation for Jersey resource when using spring-boot -starter-jersey project?
If I remove it, the Jersey servlet can still serve resources.
So what is the need for "#Component"?
You don't need it. Jersey uses HK2 as it's internal DI framework, and HK2 has a Spring bridge. This is what's used internally to bridge Spring components into the HK2 IoC container, so that they can be injected into Jersey components. And Jersey implements an AutowiredInjectionResolver1 that allows for injection of Spring components using #Autowired. You don't even need #Autowired though. All the Spring components can be injected with the normal #Inject.
The only drawback I've ran into, not making the Jersey components a Spring #Component is that it doesn't support #Value when you want to inject property values.
The one thing I don't like is that when you declare something a Spring #Component, it automatically makes it a singleton. But Jersey resources are by default request scoped. You can add a Spring #Scope("request"), and it should change the resource to a request scoped resource. Jersey has declared the Spring RequestScope, so we can use it. How exactly it ties in to Jersey's request scope, I am not a hundred percent sure. I ran into a problem a while back. I can't remember what it was, but that has kept me from ever using the Spring request scope again.
Assuming I want to keep all my resources request scoped, I would take sticking to the normal Jersey request scope, and not being able to inject #Values, over having to use Spring's request scope. Maybe I'm imagining things, and there was no issue using it, but personally I'll just stick to what I know works :-)
UPDATE
Another thing that does't work if you don't make the resource a Spring #Component is Spring's AOP. That's fine with me though as HK2 also has AOP.
1 - An InjectionResolver allows you to use custom annotations to create injection targets.
When you remove #Component jersey takes control of the scope of the instance. With #Component a singleton instance is created, removing it you can use the following jersey annotations:
• Request scope (Default):
By using the #RequestScope annotation or none, we can have a life-cycle till
the request lasts. This is the default scope of the root-resource classes. For
each new request, a new root-resource instance is being created and served
accordingly for the first time. However, when the same root-resource method
is being called, then the old instance will be used to serve the request.
• Per-lookup scope:
The #PerLookup annotation creates root-resource instances for every request.
• Singleton:
The #Singleton annotation allows us to create only a single instance
throughout the application.
Try different behaviors using a counter inside your class...
public class MyWebResource {
private int counter;
#GET
#Path("/counter")
#Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
public Response getCounter() {
counter++;
return Response.status(Status.OK).entity(counter).build();
}
}
I'm working on a project which has an aspect and has a #EnableAspectJ on a configuration.
It means all proxies of spring are created using aspectj? What happen then with #Transactional and #Async? Should it has mode attribute set to use aspectJ ? Or it will uses CGLIB and Aspectj?
From docs you need to set proxyTargetClass=true to use CGLIB proxies else standard JDK interface based proxies will be used.
Users can control the type of proxy that gets created for FooService using the proxyTargetClass() attribute. The following enables CGLIB-style 'subclass' proxies as opposed to the default interface-based JDK proxy approach.
#Configuration
#EnableAspectJAutoProxy(proxyTargetClass=true)
public class AppConfig {
// ...
}
I can not find any reason why every autowired bean are not autowired by proxy. I know that becasue #Transactional annotations do not work and I checked autowired component during debugging in eclipse. Of course every component implements some interface and I use #Autowired annotations in relation to the interface.
I have only one configuration of aop:
<tx:annotation-driven transaction-manager="transactionManager" />
I use JPA with hibernate, spring-mvc,spring-webflow, spring-security and spring-data. Interfaces which extends org.springframework.data.repository.CrudRepository are autowired by proxy. But my components are not. For example I have class MyClass which implement MyInterface:
#Service
public class MyClass implements MyInterface {
#Autowired
MyCrudReposiotry reposiotry;
....
}
If I autowire MyInterface somewhere:
#Autowired
MyInterface mi;
then mi is just reference to MyClass object, repository is refrence to proxy org.springframework.aop.framework.JdkDynamicAopProxy. Very interesting is that in testing mi is reference to proxy. My test's context does not contain web-flow and mvc configuration.
Maybe there is some indirect aop configuration which I should check. What can switch the autowiring by proxy off?
My guess is that you are scanning for the same components twice. You probably have a in your root context (for the ContextLoaderListener) and one for the DispatcherServlet. NO if the both scan for the same classes you end up with duplicated (and one proxied and one non proxied instance).
Proxying and auto wiring are independent of each other. When you use #AutoWired it finds another bean that implements the required interface and injects it. The bean instance it finds might be a normal object or a proxy - it doesn't matter to Autowired.
Proxies are created for certain beans automatically by spring. As you have noticed one scenario in which this happens is when you use #Transactional. When the spring container instantiates a bean which has the #Transactional annotation the object gets wrapped in a proxy. The actual object is replaced by the proxy in the context. This is done so that spring can intercept calls to those methods and add the begin / commit transaction calls before and after the method call. This is implemented by the spring-aop module. Any feature that relies on AOP (#Transactional, #Secured) will result in creation of a proxy.
The other case where proxies are used is to create an implementation on the fly. In case of the CRUDRepository you are required to only implement the interface. The implementation of that is created on the fly using the same proxy infrastructure.