As far as I know, Spring uses JDK to generate dynamic proxy for the classes that implement any inferface while use Cglib to generate dynamic proxy for the classes that do not implement any inferface. For decarative transcation, Spring uses proxy to add transaction aspect. Please take a look at the code below:
interface Demo {
void methodA();
}
public class DemoImpl implements Demo{
#Transactional
public void updateA() {}
#Transactional
public void updateB() {}
}
I think updateA can work well with transaction. But how about updateB method? Does the #Transactional work for it?
Maybe my understanding is not correct. It's great if the related Spring source code is provided to explain how Spring use JDK/cglib to proxy the class and interface. Thanks
I have the config in the xml:
<tx:annotation-driven transaction-manager="transactionManager" />
JDK dynamic proxy
In this case your bean is wrapped with a proxy implementing Demo interface. From that moment you can only use that interface. Trying to inject or fetch bean of DemoImpl type will result in dreadful Abstract DAO pattern and Spring's "Proxy cannot be cast to ..." problem!
This kind of answers your question - you can only access updateA() and this is the only transactional method. Annotation around updateB() is ignored.
However if you call updateB() from updateA() it will be transactional because it will bind to a transaction started by updateA() (with default transaction propagation).
CGLIB proxy
In this case the interface is ignored. cglib will create a subclass of DemoImpl (obviously also implementing Demo interface) and apply transaction behaviour on both update*() methods. Now if you inject bean of type DemoImpl (interface is not needed in this case at all and Impl suffix is ugly) you can safely and transactionally call both methods.
See my article: Spring pitfalls: proxying and Spring AOP riddle for greater details.
Related
I am migrating an EJB project to Spring boot project. I have successfully replaced other annotations to the spring annotation, but havving problem with SessionContext object.
My legacy code is bellow
#Resource
SessionContext sessionContext;
.....
if (some condition) {
sessionContext.setRollbackOnly();
return false;
}
For this code i am getting the following error
A component required a bean of type 'javax.ejb.SessionContext' that could not be found.
Action:
Consider defining a bean of type 'javax.ejb.SessionContext' in your configuration.
I think you'll have to use a few different functionalities.
setRollbackOnly()
Most often I have seen Session Context used for Rollbacks. In Spring, you can replace this with:
TransactionAspectSupport.currentTransactionStatus().setRollbackOnly();
or annotate class with
#Transactional(rollbackFor = MyException.class)
so you can throw your exception from class to cause rollback.
getBusinessObject()
The second most commonly used feature is method to load a business object so that I can, for example, create a new transaction within a same bean. In this case you can use Self-inject:
#Lazy private final AccountService self;
and annote method with #Transactional. This, of course, solves any other cases where you need to use the power of a proxy object.
Other functionality is provided by other classes in Spring, but I think that these two are the most commonly used in the Java EE world and when migrating, one will look to replace them in Spring.
I am new to AOP and I am trying to understand the difference between Method Interceptor and MethodAdvice(i.e. MethodBeforeAdvice or MethodAfterAdvice). To me looks like both are doing the same thing i.e. are called on method invocation. When should we use MethodInterceptor vs MethodAdvice.
Take a look at the definition of the org.aopalliance.interceptInterceptor interface (implemented by MethodInterceptor):
public interface Interceptor extends Advice {
}
It's easy to see that a MethodInterceptor actually IS an Advice.
The only difference between an Advice being defined in an #Aspect class and such an Interceptor is that Interceptor implementations can be added to and removed from Spring AOP Proxies at runtime (casting them to 'Advised'), whereas the Advice you're talking about is a more static construct. But their still essential to Spring AOP since their presence tells Spring which beans to wrap in a proxy object during application context startup.
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.
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);
I'm working on a very small application connecting to a MySQL database.
I'm trying to create table record but getting 'no transaction in progress'.
I have all the right stuff in place:
a service interface MyService and its implementation MyServiceImpl
I have annotated the service impl with #Service
In the controller I used the interface name for the field #Autowired MyService
I have the correct transaction configuration as it was originally generated by roo
There is a public method MyService.create(...) which MyServiceImpl implements
But,
When I remote debug and inspect the controller's myService field what I see is something like
com.some.package.services.MyService#12345 (and NOT something like $Proxy73) which to me is not right, because what should be autowired is the proxy not he target bean (which is what I think this is). If I'm correct then it makes sense that there is no transaction as the annotation would only kick in when invoking a public method annotated with #Transactional on a proxy.
Please tell me why is spring injecting the target bean in this setup.
Thanks
If you have AspectJ-enabled transaction management (<tx:annotation-driven mode="aspectj" .../>) application of transactions happens in-place in the same class, either during build (compile-time weaving) or on startup (load-time weaving).
No new classes are created (like when using cglib) and no proxies (like with ordinary interface-based AOP in Spring). Instead bytecode of MyServiceImpl was modified directly without you even noticing. Unfortunately the only way to see AOP is to decompile your classes. If you use javap -c MyServiceImpl you'll find plenty of references to Spring transaction layer.
If you are using Spring MVC, make sure to scan specific controller classes alone in servlet context file. Otherwise it will scan 2 times and transaction is not available on the application context.