I have been able to create a java hook exactly with the method specified here:
https://orientdb.com/docs/2.2.x/Tutorial-Java-Hooks.html
But I don't want my hook to run for every database present on the server. I want to enable it only for one specific database.
Is it possible to do that simply by specifying it declaratively on the orientdb-server-config.xml ? or By configuring the hook in my Java class extending ODocumentHookAbstract ? Otherwise any idea how to do it programmatically ?
You can do this programatically by conditionally registering your hook based on the database name and implementing the database life cycle listener ODatabaseLifecycleListener. From the docs on hook self registration, you can do this in the overridden onOpen() method with something like:
public class MyHook extends ODocumentHookAbstract implements ODatabaseLifecycleListener {
...
#Override
public void onOpen(final ODatabase iDatabase) {
if("someSpecificDatabaseName".equals(iDatabase.getName()) {
// REGISTER THE HOOK
((ODatabaseComplex<?>)iDatabase).registerHook(this);
}
}
}
ODatabase.getName() javadoc
Related
In my application I am currently creating a JpaRepository via the usual mechanism, i.e. by defining an interface like so:
public interface HistoryInfoRepository extends JpaRepository<HistoryInfo, Long>
This works all fine BUT if the DB is not available or not accessible when starting up the application then the creation of the repo bean fails, the injection into the respective service (which receives that repo as an autowired constructor argument) fails and as a consequence my applications main class:
SpringApplication.run(Application.class, args);
fails as well. I.e. the entire application just fails with a gigantic stacktrace.
I would want to make situation a bit more user friendly in that the application at least comes up so far that it is able to display some (hopefully) helpful error message with an explanation and some hints what should be checked for.
That would require to NOT autowire the JpaRepository but create it programmatically, e.g. in said service's constructor but wrapped within some try - catch construct.
I don't want to give up that convenience that the JpaRepository mechanism provides but how can one create such a JpaRepository programmatically when there is only an interface defined and everything else is done automagically by Spring?
Is there some API-call to create such a JpaRepository for a given interface?
I would like to see something like this:
public HistoryInfoService( /* HistoryInfoRepository historyRepo */) {
...
try {
historyRepo = createJpaRepositoryFromInterface(HistoryInfoRepository.class);
} catch (Exception ex) {
// inform user about missing or non-reachable DB server and suggest remedies...
}
...
}
Here I commented away the constructor argument which is normally provided via auto-wiring, but instead I want to create the JpaRepository using some method-call. That would allow me to properly react to the failed Repo-creation as indicated by the comment in the catch clause.
I searched for something like that but I must have been using the wrong search terms and found nothing so far. Any hints?
I'm having problems finding proper solution for my problem, namely:
Let's consider workflow:
Application starts
Main components are registered in Autofac
Application loads plugin assembly and registers modules within it
Container is being build
Plugin handling logic is run
Plugin can add its own controllers. To properly handle that I had to prepare interface which will provide me types of custom controllers:
interface ICustomControllerProvider
{
IEnumerable<Type> GetControllerTypes();
}
Based on the above my app knows how to integrate specified types as controllers.
All controllers are also defined as services, so Autofac deals with their creation, and so...
Problem:
I want to avoid specifying custom controller type twice
public PluginControllerProvider : ICustomControllerProvider
{
public IEnumerable<Type> GetControllerTypes()
{
// 1st type specification
// controller types are specified here, so they could be integrated with app
yield return typeof(ControllerX);
yield return typeof(ControllerY);
}
}
public class PluginModule : Module
{
protected override void Load(ContainerBuilder builder)
{
builder.RegisterType<PluginControllerProvider>().As<ICustomControllerProvider>();
// 2nd type specification
// controllers have to be register in module as well
builder.RegisterType<ControllerX>();
builder.RegisterType<ControllerY>();
}
}
Is there any way how ControllerX and ControllerY could be managed by Autofac, where I specified them only in PluginControllerProvider?
I tried achieving that by providing custom registration source and resolving ICustomControllerProvider, however I cannot resolve ICustomControllerProvider based on arguments provided by IEnumerable<IComponentRegistration> RegistrationsFor(Service service, Func<Service, IEnumerable<ServiceRegistration>> registrationAccessor) from IRegistrationSource
Autofac does not offer the ability to inject a list of types registered with Autofac. You'll have to get that yourself by working with the lifetime scope registry.
Before I get into how you might solve this, I should probably note:
Listing the types registered is not a normal thing from a DI perspective. It'd be like listing all the controllers in your MVC application - you don't normally need to do that, and if you did, you'd likely need to build a whole metadata structure on top of it like the ApiExplorer that was built to do that on top of ASP.NET Core. That structure wouldn't be supported or involved with the DI system because you're querying about the system, not injecting live instances into the system.
If you are relying on DI to resolve controllers, you probably don't need a whole separate controller provider. Once you know what type you need for the request, you'd just resolve it.
All that's to say, while I'll answer the question, the way the design here is posed may be something you'd want to look at. What you're doing, trying to involve DI with listing metadata about the app... seems somewhat backwards (you'd feed the DI container based on the list of types, not get the list of types from the DI container).
But let's just go with it. Given:
There are controllers registered with Autofac
The controllers have no common base class or interface
There's no attributes on the controllers you could query
What I'd do is register all the controllers with some metadata. You need something to be able to locate the controllers in the list of all the types in the container.
builder.RegisterType<ControllerX>().WithMetadata("controller", true);
builder.RegisterType<ControllerY>().WithMetadata("controller", true);
Now in the plugin controller, you need to inject an ILifetimeScope because you have to query the list of stuff registered. The ILifetimeScope that gets injected into the controller will be the same scope from which the plugin controller itself was resolved.
You can use the injected scope to query things in the component registry tagged with your metadata.
public class PluginControllerProvider : ICustomControllerProvider
{
private readonly Type[] _controllerTypes;
public PluginController(ILifetimeScope scope)
{
_controllerTypes = scope
.ComponentRegistry
.Registrations
.Where(r => r.Metadata.ContainsKey("controller"))
.Select(r => r.Activator.LimitType)
.ToArray();
}
public IEnumerable<Type> GetControllerTypes()
{
return _controllerTypes;
}
}
Now, disclaimers:
If you are registering more controllers in child lifetime scopes (e.g., during a BeginLifetimeScope() call), you will need a controller provider from that scope or it won't get all the controller types. The provider needs to come from the scope that has all the registrations.
If you're using registration sources (like the AnyConcreteTypeNotAlreadyRegisteredSource), this won't capture things that come from the registration sources. It'll only capture things that come from direct registrations of a type (or lambda) on a ContainerBuilder.
But it should work.
I'm trying to get dependencies set up correctly in my Workflow application. It seems the best way to do this is using the Service Locator pattern that is provided by Workflow's WorkflowExtensions.
My workflow uses two repositories: IAssetRepository and ISenderRepository. Both have implementations using Entity Framework: EFAssetRepository, and EFSenderRepository, but I'd like both to use the same DbContext.
I'm having trouble getting both to use the same DbContext. I'm used to using IoC for dependency injection, so I thought I'd have to inject the DbContext into the EF repositories via their constructor, but this seems like it would be mixing the service locator and IoC pattern, and I couldn't find an easy way to achieve it, so I don't think this is the way forward.
I guess I need to chain the service locator calls? So that the constructor of my EF repositories do something like this:
public class EFAssetRepository
{
private MyEntities entities;
public EFAssetRepository()
{
this.entities = ActivityContext.GetExtension<MyEntities>();
}
}
Obviously the above won't work because the reference to ActivityContext is made up.
How can I achieve some form of dependency chain using the service locator pattern provided for WF?
Thanks,
Nick
EDIT
I've posted a workaround for my issue below, but I'm still not happy with it. I want the code activity to be able to call metadata.Require<>(), because it should be ignorant of how extensions are loaded, it should just expect that they are. As it is, my metadata.Require<> call will stop the workflow because the extension appears to not be loaded.
It seems one way to do this is by implementing IWorkflowInstanceExtension on an extension class, to turn it into a sort of composite extension. Using this method, I can solve my problem thus:
public class UnitOfWorkExtension : IWorkflowInstanceExtension, IUnitOfWork
{
private MyEntities entities = new MyEntities();
IEnumerable<object> IWorkflowInstanceExtension.GetAdditionalExtensions()
{
return new object[] { new EFAssetRepository(this.entities), new EFSenderRepository(this.entities) };
}
void IWorkflowInstanceExtension.SetInstance(WorkflowInstanceProxy instance) { }
public void SaveChanges()
{
this.entities.SaveChanges();
}
}
The biggest downside to doing it this way is that you can't call metadata.RequireExtension<IAssetRepository>() or metadata.RequireExtension<ISenderRepository>() in the CacheMetadata method of a CodeActivity, which is common practice. Instead, you must call metadata.RequireExtension<IUnitOfWork>(), but it is still fine to do context.GetExtension<IAssetRepository>() in the Execute() method of the CodeActivity. I imagine this is because the CacheMetadata method is called before any workflow instances are created, and if no workflow instances are created, the extension factory won't have been called, and therefore the additional extensions won't have been loaded into the WorkflowInstanceExtensionManager, so essentially, it won't know about the additional extensions until a workflow instance is created.
I'm automatically registering multiple components that implement the same interface:
container.Kernel.Resolver.AddSubResolver(
new ArrayResolver(container.Kernel));
container.Register(AllTypes.FromAssembly(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly())
.BasedOn<IPaymentPostProcessor>()
.WithService.FromInterface(typeof(IPaymentPostProcessor))
.Configure(c => c.Named(c.Implementation.Name))
.Configure(c => c.LifeStyle.PerWebRequest));
This works when I have a dependency on the array itself:
public class PaymentPostProcessorManager{
public PaymentPostProcessorManager(IPaymentPostProcessor[] processors){}
}
But doesn't if I have a dependency on a specific component implementing the interface:
public class SpecialService{
public OtherService(SpecificPostProcessor processor){}
}
This fails, it says no components have been registered for SpecificPostProcessor. If I individually register that SpecificPostProcessor, it the array resolution ends up including it twice.
How can I do the automatic registration based on the interface AND have it automatically register it for specific dependencies?
You need to add WithService.Self() for your SpecificPostProcessor If you want to expose it as a service.
I start loving OSGi services more and more and want to realize a lot more of my components as services. Now I'm looking for best-practice, especially for UI components.
For Listener-relations I use the whiteboard-pattern, which IMHO opinion is the best approach. However if I want more than just notifications, I can think of three possible solutions.
Imagine the following scenario:
interface IDatabaseService {
EntityManager getEntityManager();
}
[1] Whiteboard Pattern - with self setting service
I would create a new service interface:
interface IDatabaseServiceConsumer {
setDatabaseService(IDatabaseService service);
}
and create a declarative IDatabaseService component with a bindConsumer method like this
protected void bindConsumer(IDatabaseServiceConsumer consumer) {
consumer.setDatabaseService(this);
}
protected void unbindConsumer(IDatabaseServiceConsumer consumer) {
consumer.setDatabaseService(null);
}
This approach assumes that there's only one IDatabaseService.
[Update] Usage would look like this:
class MyUIClass ... {
private IDatabaseService dbService;
Consumer c = new IDatabaseServiceConsumer() {
setDatabaseService(IDatabaseService service) {
dbService = service;
}
}
Activator.registerService(IDatabaseServiceConsumer.class,c,null);
...
}
[2] Make my class a service
Image a class like
public class DatabaseEntryViewer extends TableViewer
Now, I just add bind/unbind methods for my IDatabaseService and add a component.xml and add my DatabaseEntryViewer. This approach assumes, that there is a non-argument constructor and I create the UI components via a OSGi-Service-Factory.
[3] Classic way: ServiceTracker
The classic way to register a static ServiceTracker in my Activator and access it. The class which uses the tracker must handle the dynamic.
Currently I'm favoring the first one, as this approach doesn't complicated object creation and saves the Activator from endless, static ServiceTrackers.
I have to agree with #Neil Bartlett, your option 1 is backward. You are in effect using an Observer/Observable pattern.
Number 2 is not going to work, since the way UI objects lifecycles are managed in RCP won't allow you to do what you want. The widget will have to be created as part of the initialization of some sort of view container (ViewPart, Dialog, ...). This view part is typically configured and managed via the Workbench/plugin mechanism. You should work with this, not against it.
Number 3 would be a simple option, not necessarily the best, but simple.
If you use Spring DM, then you can easily accomplish number 2. It provides a means to inject your service beans into your UI Views, Pages, etc. You use a spring factory to create your views (as defined in your plugin.xml), which is configured via a Spring configuration, which is capable of injecting your services into the bean.
You may also be able to combine the technique used by the SpringExtensionFactory class along with DI to accomplish the same thing, without introducing another piece of technology. I haven't tried it myself so I cannot comment on the difficulty, although it is what I would try to do to bridge the gap between RCP and OSGi if I wasn't already using Spring DM.