Say I have a file with each line depicting a different command (but of the same kind), which I want to read out and check and run and maybe do other operations such as merging, comparing and most importantly, store the commands into database.
To do that, I create the Command Class, and new a new Command object while reading each line of the file. Now the problem is, a Command object need to make use of, say a Spring bean which provides database access. As a result, I have to pass in that bean as a constructor argument of the Command class, which is very ugly, which doesn't seem to be the "Spring way"...
and I don't want to use ApplicationContextAware to make my class coupled to the Spring context.
Is there a best practice for this situation?
I very new to Spring and I know it might be a dumb question ...
I would create a CommandFactory that is coupled with spring and use that in your consumer instead. If the factory implements an interface you are not coupling yourself in the consumer and you don't close your possibilities of using a different -non spring coupled- one at a later point (e.g. testing).
In this case I think it is the best way to make the classes created by new Spring Beans.
Therefor annotate them with #Configurable, enable AspectJ, and read the Spring Reference Chapter 7.8.1 Using AspectJ to dependency inject domain objects with Spring
Related
I have been working with Spring Data JPA repository in my project for some time and I know the below points:
In the repository interfaces, we can add the methods like findByCustomerNameAndPhone() (assuming customerName and phone are fields in the domain object).
Then, Spring provides the implementation by implementing the above repository interface methods at runtime (during the application run).
I am interested on how this has been coded and I have looked at the Spring JPA source code & APIs, but I could not find answers to the questions below:
How is the repository implementation class generated at runtime & methods being implemented and injected?
Does Spring Data JPA use CGlib or any bytecode manipulation libraries to implement the methods and inject dynamically?
Could you please help with the above queries and also provide any supported documentation ?
First of all, there's no code generation going on, which means: no CGLib, no byte-code generation at all. The fundamental approach is that a JDK proxy instance is created programmatically using Spring's ProxyFactory API to back the interface and a MethodInterceptor intercepts all calls to the instance and routes the method into the appropriate places:
If the repository has been initialized with a custom implementation part (see that part of the reference documentation for details), and the method invoked is implemented in that class, the call is routed there.
If the method is a query method (see DefaultRepositoryInformation for how that is determined), the store specific query execution mechanism kicks in and executes the query determined to be executed for that method at startup. For that a resolution mechanism is in place that tries to identify explicitly declared queries in various places (using #Query on the method, JPA named queries) eventually falling back to query derivation from the method name. For the query mechanism detection, see JpaQueryLookupStrategy. The parsing logic for the query derivation can be found in PartTree. The store specific translation into an actual query can be seen e.g. in JpaQueryCreator.
If none of the above apply the method executed has to be one implemented by a store-specific repository base class (SimpleJpaRepository in case of JPA) and the call is routed into an instance of that.
The method interceptor implementing that routing logic is QueryExecutorMethodInterceptor, the high level routing logic can be found here.
The creation of those proxies is encapsulated into a standard Java based Factory pattern implementation. The high-level proxy creation can be found in RepositoryFactorySupport. The store-specific implementations then add the necessary infrastructure components so that for JPA you can go ahead and just write code like this:
EntityManager em = … // obtain an EntityManager
JpaRepositoryFactory factory = new JpaRepositoryFactory(em);
UserRepository repository = factory.getRepository(UserRepository.class);
The reason I mention that explicitly is that it should become clear that, in its core, nothing of that code requires a Spring container to run in the first place. It needs Spring as a library on the classpath (because we prefer to not reinvent the wheel), but is container agnostic in general.
To ease the integration with DI containers we've of course then built integration with Spring Java configuration, an XML namespace, but also a CDI extension, so that Spring Data can be used in plain CDI scenarios.
I'm new to spring 5 and my question is why does spring use DI and IOC? I mean why do we have to write the beans in an XML (legacy) and then create it where we need it? Why don't we use one method instead that gives us that object, until we want to use this complex mechanism that happens in the spring container?
And another question is, does not reading XML slow down the program? Because we are reading from the hard disk anyway.
Note: It is true that we can use annotations, but for now I want to ask a question about reading from xml.
Spring IoC Container is the core of Spring Framework. It creates the objects, configures and assembles their dependencies, manages their entire life cycle. The Container uses Dependency Injection(DI) to manage the components that make up the application. It gets the information about the objects from a configuration file(XML) or Java Code or Java Annotations and Java POJO class. These objects are called Beans. Since the Controlling of Java objects and their lifecycle is not done by the developers, hence the name Inversion Of Control.
More on link HERE
As for your first part of the question.
why does spring use DI
To allow the developer to keep his code loose, and not entagle classes, it keeps your code clean.
In object oriented design, the amount of coupling refers to how much the design of one class depends on the design of another class. In other words, how often do changes in class A force related changes in class B? Tight coupling means the two classes often change together, loose coupling means they are mostly independent. In general, loose coupling is recommended because it's easier to test and maintain.
You may find this paper by Martin Fowler (PDF) helpful.
I mean why do we have to write the beans in an XML (legacy) and then create it where we need it
Note: We write the bean in XML and it is created when application starts when it looks at bean defintion, techinally you are never creating a bean, you are fetching only created bean from Spring Container(IOC) that Spring created for you when you started your application.
We are writing bean blueprint, or just bean, so that it can be constructed, placed in the Spring Container when the application starts, and then we have it at our disposal that we can fetch it using getBean method.
The whole point of "why", is because by default all beans are scoped as singleton, that means, when you fetch a bean, and do with it whatever you want, you do not worry about memory or anything, Spring takes care of the beans for you if they are scoped as a Singleton.
Second question:
And another question is, does not reading XML slow down the program? Because we are reading from the hard disk anyway.
There is no difference in performance between annotation or XML, it is just a different approach, I am not sure what you mean by "reading from hard disk", but one way or another you will have to configure your application, yes, many forums prefer to run away from XML, but in my honest opinion the only reason for that is because when you write a bad configuration in XML it is lot harder to find it compared to configuration in Java that will throw an exception.
XML, application.properties files require a redeployment of the application, while annotation and java configuration require recompilation of your project, so both of them have "flaws", but it is normal and quite understandable to me.
But in the end I believe that it is a matter of preference, I know personally quite a few people that combine annotations with XML configuration and they know lot more about Spring compared to me.
So in summary, it is pain to write beans and their configuration, same as you can write a class with methods without creating an interface for it since the result will be the same, but it will help you in the long run since you do not have to worry about memory or if you destroyed that bean or if you did not.
It would be nice that you read about
1.Lazy initialization of beans
2.Eager initialization of beans
3.Singleton scope of beans
4.Prototype scope of beans
Which below case will give me better performance
Using Spring Boot Autowired annotation for creating an object
Or
Using new key for creating an object.
I understand with spring annotations will have a choice of using lot more inbuilt features.
Kindly help me to understand
You need to learn an Inversion of Control pattern first of all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inversion_of_control
Then you need to make yourself familiar with Spring Framework as an implementation of it: https://spring.io/projects/spring-framework
In two words answering your question: the Spring way with its dependency injection is much better by performance at runtime, then manual new managing. Just because Spring instantiates objects only once, at start up (mostly) and then provide you those ready objects. With new you have to manage then yourself and in most cases you lose with GC and memory (de)allocation.
I have just started learning Java Spring and the concept of Dependency Injection (DI) and Inversion of Control (IoC).
I learned that all objects whether it is singleton, prototype or request and sessions, are all retrieved from the container.
The container manages the dependencies between classes and the lifecycle/scope of the object.
The fundamental idea behind this is there are no "new" operators for application using Spring Framework as the backbone of the system. (Please correct me if I am wrong).
I wanted to modernize legacy applications coded without the Spring framework and manages the 3rd party libraries classes and injects them using Spring.
How should I approach this?
I learned that all objects whether it is singleton, prototype or request and sessions, are all retrieved from the container.
That is not quite right. Not all objects, but those you have the cotainer told to resolve, are retrieved from the container. In general you use the #Component annotation to mark which of your objects should the container know of. Besides #Component there are other annotations which do in principle the same, but allow a more finegrained semantics, e.g. #Repository annotation, which is at its base #Component and put #Target, #Retention, #Documented on top.
The container manages the dependencies between classes and the lifecycle/scope of the object.
Yes. The container does the wiring up for you, i.e. resolving dependencies annotated with #Ressource, #Autowired or #Inject depending on which annotation you prefer.
During the lifecycle there are possible events, which allow usage of lifecycle callbacks.
Also: You could determine the bean scope.
The fundamental idea behind this is there are no "new" operators for application using Spring Framework as the backbone of the system. (Please correct me if I am wrong).
The fundamental principle is, that you delegate the creation of objects of a certain kind to the container. Separation of creation and consumption of objects allows greater flexibility and in consequence better testability of your application.
Besides the "components" of your application, there are e.g. the typical containers like ArrayList or HashMap, upon which you use the new-operator as before.
I wanted to modernize legacy applications coded without the Spring framework and manages the 3rd party libraries classes and injects them using Spring.
How should I approach this?
From what was said above, it should be "simple":
1) Go through each class file and look for its dependencies
2) Refactor those out and put #Component on top of the class
Special case: 3rd party objects, where you do not have access to the source. Then you have to wrap its construction yourself into a factory e.g. with #Bean.
3) Add the missing dependencies via #Autowired (the spring specific annotation for marking dependencies)
4) Refactor components of the service layer with #Service annotationinstead of #Component.
5) Refactor the data access layer, instead of using #Component, you can use #Repository.
This should give you a base to work with.
I've gotten the basics of Spring more or less down (I think) and I'm trying out new things. Currently, I'm trying to figure out a way not to have explicitly write a service class for each entity/repository if that service is just going to be extending a generic service class.
What I'd like to be able to do is, after the Entity and Repository beans are loaded, loop through them, check to see if a bean named [Model Name]Service exists and, if it does not, create a new instance of my generic service class, pass in the Repository object, and then register this service in the applicationContext.
Is this possible and if so, what is the best way to do it? I've been trying to figure out the PostProcessors, but the one that I think would actual work (BeanPostProcessor) doesn't seem like the appropriate place to do this.
Thanks for your time