I'm trying to execute the following SQL statement every time the Database Session gets refreshed. I have a Spring Boot 2.0.1.RELEASE with JPA application and a PostgreSQL Database.
select set_config('SOME KEY', 'SOME VALUE', false);
As the PostgreSQL documentation states the is_local parameter is used to indicate that this configuration value will apply just for the current transaction -if true- or will be attached to the session (as I require) -if false-
The problem is that I'm not aware when Hibernate/Hikari are refreshing the db session, so, in practice, the application start failing when it has a couple of minutes running, as you can imagine...
My approach -that is not working yet- is to implement a EmptyInterceptor, for that I have added a DatabaseCustomizer class to inject my hibernate.session_factory.interceptor properly in a way that Spring can fill out all my #Autowires
DatabaseInterceptor.class
#Component
public class DatabaseInterceptor extends EmptyInterceptor {
#Autowired
private ApplicationContext context;
#Override
public void afterTransactionBegin(Transaction tx) {
PersistenceService pc = context.getBean(PersistenceService.class);
try {
pc.addPostgresConfig("SOME KEY", "SOME VALUE");
System.out.println("Config added...");
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
DatabaseCustomizer.class
#Component
public class DatabaseCustomizer implements HibernatePropertiesCustomizer {
#Autowired
private DatabaseInterceptor databaseInterceptor;
#Override
public void customize(Map<String, Object> hibernateProperties) {
hibernateProperties.put("hibernate.session_factory.interceptor", databaseInterceptor);
}
}
Obviously, there is a problem with this approach because when I #Override the afterTransactionBegin method to start another transaction I get an Infinite loop.
I tried to look something inside that Transaction tx that could help to be sure that this transaction is not being generated by my own addPostgresConfig but there is not much on it.
Is there something else I could try to achieve this?
Thanks in advance,
Related
I have a bare-bones Spring-Boot app with some GraphQL endpoints and a Postgres database and want to run an integration test against an endpoint. It should find an entity by its ID and does so without a problem when I send a request manually via Postman. However when I write an integration test for the controller it doesn't. The data seems to be saved after using
TestEntityManager (or the JpaRepository directly) an I get the entity back with its ID. I then stick that ID into a query with HttpGraphQlTester which fails with an empty result/null. I traced it with the debugger and discovered that when the endpoint calls the repository to retrieve the entity with the given ID it gets null or when I look at all the repo-contents it's just an empty list. So my data seems to be accessible in my test but not in my repo/service. Any pointers would be very much appreciated.
Test
#SpringBootTest
#AutoConfigureHttpGraphQlTester
#AutoConfigureTestEntityManager
#Transactional
public class BackboneTreeControllerTest {
#Autowired
HttpGraphQlTester tester;
#Autowired
private TestEntityManager testEntityManager;
#Test
void findTaxon() {
Taxon taxon = Taxon.builder()
.path(Arrays.asList("path", "to", "taxon"))
.nameCanonical("Cocos nucifera")
.authorship("Me")
.extinct(false)
.numDescendants(1l)
.numOccurrences(1l)
.build();
Taxon savedTaxon = testEntityManager.persistFlushFind(taxon); // (1)
this.tester.documentName("queries")
.operationName("FindTaxon")
.variable("taxonId", savedTaxon.getId())
.execute()
.path("findTaxon.authorship")
.entity(String.class)
.isEqualTo("Me");
the testEntityManager returns successfully with an ID.
Query
query FindTaxon($taxonId: ID!) {
findTaxon(id: $taxonId) {
authorship
}
}
Controller
#Controller
#AllArgsConstructor
public class BackboneTreeController {
private final TaxonService taxonService;
#QueryMapping
public Taxon findTaxon(#Argument Integer id) {
Optional<Taxon> taxon = taxonService.findTaxon(id);
return taxon.orElse(null);
}
}
Service
#Service
#AllArgsConstructor
public class TaxonService {
private final TaxonRepository taxonRepository;
public Optional<Taxon> findTaxon(Integer id) {
return taxonRepository.findById(id); // (2)
}
}
This is where I would expect the repo to return the entity but it does not. Also using .findAll here returns an empty list.
Repository
#Repository
public interface TaxonRepository extends JpaRepository<Taxon, Integer> {
}
Note that everything works fine when I just run the app and send the exact same query manually!
I don't know HttpGraphQlTester but I'd assume that it generates requests which then get processed in a separate thread.
That thread won't see the changes made in the test because they aren't committed yet.
If this is the reason resolve it by putting the setup in it's own transaction, for example by using TransactionTemplate.
I'm testing an upgrade of my Spring Cloud DataFlow services from Spring Cloud Dalston.SR4/Spring Boot 1.5.9 to Spring Cloud Edgware/Spring Boot 1.5.9. Some of my services extend source (or sink) components from the app starters. I've found this does not work with Spring Cloud Edgware.
For example, I have overridden org.springframework.cloud.stream.app.rabbit.source.RabbitSourceConfiguration and bound my app to my overridden version. This has previously worked with Spring Cloud versions going back almost a year.
With Edgware, I get the following (whether the app is run standalone or within dataflow):
***************************
APPLICATION FAILED TO START
***************************
Description:
Field channels in org.springframework.cloud.stream.app.rabbit.source.RabbitSourceConfiguration required a bean of type 'org.springframework.cloud.stream.messaging.Source' that could not be found.
Action:
Consider defining a bean of type 'org.springframework.cloud.stream.messaging.Source' in your configuration.
I get the same behaviour with the 1.3.0.RELEASE and 1.2.0.RELEASE of spring-cloud-starter-stream-rabbit.
I override RabbitSourceConfiguration so I can set a header mapper on the AmqpInboundChannelAdapter, and also to perform a connectivity test prior to starting up the container.
My subclass is bound to the Spring Boot application with #EnableBinding(HeaderMapperRabbitSourceConfiguration.class). A cutdown version of my subclass is:
public class HeaderMapperRabbitSourceConfiguration extends RabbitSourceConfiguration {
public HeaderMapperRabbitSourceConfiguration(final MyHealthCheck healthCheck,
final MyAppConfig config) {
// ...
}
#Bean
#Override
public AmqpInboundChannelAdapter adapter() {
final AmqpInboundChannelAdapter adapter = super.adapter();
adapter.setHeaderMapper(new NotificationHeaderMapper(config));
return adapter;
}
#Bean
#Override
public SimpleMessageListenerContainer container() {
if (config.performConnectivityCheckOnStartup()) {
if (LOGGER.isInfoEnabled()) {
LOGGER.info("Attempting connectivity with ...");
}
final Health health = healthCheck.health();
if (health.getStatus() == Status.DOWN) {
LOGGER.error("Unable to connect .....");
throw new UnableToLoginException("Unable to connect ...");
} else if (LOGGER.isInfoEnabled()) {
LOGGER.info("Connectivity established with ...");
}
}
return super.container();
}
}
You really should never do stuff like healthCheck.health(); within a #Bean definition. The application context is not yet fully baked or started; it may, or may not, work depending on the order that beans are created.
If you want to prevent the app from starting, add a bean that implements SmartLifecycle, put the bean in a late phase (high value) so it's started after everything else. Then put your code in start(). autStartup must be true.
In this case, it's being run before the stream infrastructure has created the channel.
Some ordering might have changed from the earlier release but, in any case, performing activity like this in a #Bean definition is dangerous.
You just happened to be lucky before.
EDIT
I just noticed your #EnableBinding is wrong; it should be Source.class. I can't see how that would ever have worked - that's what creates the bean for the channels field of type Source.
This works fine for me after updating stream and the binder to 1.3.0.RELEASE...
#Configuration
public class MySource extends RabbitSourceConfiguration {
#Bean
#Override
public AmqpInboundChannelAdapter adapter() {
AmqpInboundChannelAdapter adapter = super.adapter();
adapter.setHeaderMapper(new MyMapper());
return adapter;
}
}
and
#SpringBootApplication
#EnableBinding(Source.class)
public class DemoApplication {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SpringApplication.run(DemoApplication.class, args);
}
}
If that doesn't work, please edit the question to show your POM.
I'm struggling with Play and JPA in order to be able to use two different javax.persistence.Entity model associated to two different persistence units (needed to be able to connect to different DB - for example an Oracle and a MySQL db).
The problem come from the Transaction which is always bind to the default JPA persitenceUnit (see jpa.default option).
Here is two controller actions which show the solution I found to manually define the persistence :
package controllers;
import models.Company;
import models.User;
import play.db.jpa.JPA;
import play.db.jpa.Transactional;
import play.mvc.Controller;
import play.mvc.Result;
public class Application extends Controller {
//This method run with the otherPersistenceUnit
#Transactional(value="other")
public static Result test1() {
JPA.em().persist(new Company("MyCompany"));
//Transaction is run with the "defaultPersistenceUnit"
JPA.withTransaction(new play.libs.F.Callback0() {
#Override
public void invoke() throws Throwable {
JPA.em().persist(new User("Bobby"));
}
});
return ok();
}
//This action run with the otherPersistenceUnit
#Transactional
public static Result test2() {
JPA.em().persist(new User("Ryan"));
try {
JPA.withTransaction("other", false, new play.libs.F.Function0<Void>() {
public Void apply() throws Throwable {
JPA.em().persist(new Company("YourCompany"));
return null;
}
});
} catch (Throwable throwable) {
throw new RuntimeException(throwable);
}
return ok();
}
}
This solution doesn't seem to be really "clean". I'd like to know if you know a better way to avoid the need to manually modify the transaction used.
For this purpose, I created a repo on git with a working sample application which shows how I configured the project.
https://github.com/cm0s/play2-jpa-multiple-persistenceunit
Thank you for your help
i met the same problem, too. too many advices are about PersistenceUnit annotation or getJPAConfig. but both them seem not work in play framework.
i found out a method which works well in my projects. maybe you can try it.
playframework2 how to open multi-datasource configuration with jpa
gud luk!
First I want to explain my self-invoked ejb method in this situation. I have a stateful session bean with a method which starts a new transaction (Annotated by #REQUIRES_NEW). To invoke this method inside the bean itself and make the annotation effective, I use SessionContext#getBusinessObject() to achieve the effect of #EJB (#EJB here causes stackoverflow?!). My code is shown below:
#Stateful
#Local
public class TransactionTest implements ITransactionTest {
#PersistenceContext(unitName="Table",Type=PersistenceContextType.EXTENDED)
private EntityManager manager;
#Resource
SessionContext sc;
ITransactionTest me;
#PostConstruct
public void init(){
me = this.sc.getBusinessObject(ITransactionTest.class);
}
public void generateRecord(int i) throws RuntimeException{
Record record = new Record();
record.setId(i+"");
record.status(1);
manager.persist(record);
manager.flush(); //If not flush, result is correct. Why?
me.updateRecord(i);
}
#TransactionAttribute(TransactionAttributeType.REQUIRES_NEW)
public void updateRecord(int i) throws RuntimeException{
try {
Record record = manager.find(Record.class, i+"");
record.setStatus(2);
manager.flush();
} catch(Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
throw new RuntimeException();
}
}
}
While,generateRecord() runs properly. The console shows it executes 'insert' and 'update' HQL without any exception (I use Hibernate as JPA provider). However, the 'update' result doesn't appear in the database. Why? Does updateRecord() commit correctly?
Also, I try it in two altenative ways: First is invoking generateRecord() (it will no longer invoke updateRecord()) and updateRecord() consecutively in another bean. It can give me the right result.
The second is removing the first flush(). Then both 'insert' and 'update' HQL will be executed at the second flush(). This method can also produce right result.
My program is running under JBOSS 6.1.0-Final and database is Oracle.
Best Regards,
Kajelas
I'm working on trying to get an AsyncController to work in OrchardProject. The current version I'm using is 2.2.4.9.0.
I've had 2 people eyeball my code: http://www.pastie.org/2117952 (AsyncController) which works fine in a regular MVC3 vanilla application.
Basically, I can route to IndexCompleted, but I can't route to Index. I am going to assume i'm missing something in the Autofac configuration of the overall project.
I think the configuration is in the global.asax: http://pastie.org/2118008
What I'm looking for is some guidance on if this is the correct way to implement autofac for AsyncControllers, or if there is something/someplace else I need to implement/initialize/etc.
~Dan
Orchard appears to register its own IActionInvoker, called Orchard.Mvc.Filters.FilterResolvingActionInvoker.
This class derives from ControllerActionInvoker. At a guess, in order to support async actions, it should instead derive from AsyncControllerActionInvoker.
Hope this helps!
Nick
The Autofac setup looks ok, and as long as you can navigate to something I cannot say that your assumption makes sense. Also, the pattern you are using for initialization in global.asax is used by others too.
The AsyncController requires that async methods come in pairs, in your case IndexAsync & IndexCompleted. These together represent the Index action. When you say you can navigate to IndexCompleted, do you mean that you open a url "..../IndexCompleted"?
Also, and this I cannot confirm from any documentation, but I would guess that AsyncController requires that all actions are async. Thus, your NewMessage action causes trouble and should be converted to an async NewMessageAsync & NewMessageCompleted pair.
I did too needed to have AsyncController which I easily changed FilterResolvingActionInvoker to be based on AsyncControllerActionInvoker instead of ControllerActionInvoker.
But there was other problems because of automatic transaction disposal after completion of request. In AsyncController starting thread and the thread that completes the request can be different which throws following exception in Dispose method of TransactionManager class:
A TransactionScope must be disposed on the same thread that it was created.
This exception is suppressed without any logging and really was hard to find out. In this case session remains not-disposed and subsequent sessions will timeout.
So I made dispose method public on ITransactionManager and now in my AsyncController, whenever I need a query to database I wrap it in:
using (_services.TransactionManager) {
.....
}
new TransactionManager :
public interface ITransactionManager : IDependency, IDisposable {
void Demand();
void Cancel();
}
public class TransactionManager : ITransactionManager {
private TransactionScope _scope;
private bool _cancelled;
public TransactionManager() {
Logger = NullLogger.Instance;
}
public ILogger Logger { get; set; }
public void Demand() {
if (_scope == null) {
Logger.Debug("Creating transaction on Demand");
_scope = new TransactionScope(
TransactionScopeOption.Required,
new TransactionOptions {
IsolationLevel = IsolationLevel.ReadCommitted
});
_cancelled = false;
}
}
void ITransactionManager.Cancel() {
Logger.Debug("Transaction cancelled flag set");
_cancelled = true;
}
void IDisposable.Dispose() {
if (_scope != null) {
if (!_cancelled) {
Logger.Debug("Marking transaction as complete");
_scope.Complete();
}
Logger.Debug("Final work for transaction being performed");
try {
_scope.Dispose();
}
catch {
// swallowing the exception
}
Logger.Debug("Transaction disposed");
}
_scope = null;
}
}
Please notice that I have made other small changes to TransactionManager.
I tried the AsyncControllerActionInvoker route as well to no avail. I would get intermittent errors from Orchard itself with the following errors:
Orchard.Exceptions.DefaultExceptionPolicy - An unexpected exception was caught
System.TimeoutException: The operation has timed out.
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncResultWrapper.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End()
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.ReflectedAsyncActionDescriptor.EndExecute(IAsyncResult asyncResult)
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncControllerActionInvoker.<>c__DisplayClass3f.<BeginInvokeAsynchronousActionMethod>b__3e(IAsyncResult asyncResult)
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncResultWrapper.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End()
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncControllerActionInvoker.EndInvokeActionMethod(IAsyncResult asyncResult)
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncControllerActionInvoker.<>c__DisplayClass37.<>c__DisplayClass39.<BeginInvokeActionMethodWithFilters>b__33()
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncControllerActionInvoker.<>c__DisplayClass4f.<InvokeActionMethodFilterAsynchronously>b__49()
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncControllerActionInvoker.<>c__DisplayClass4f.<InvokeActionMethodFilterAsynchronously>b__49()
at System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncControllerActionInvoker.<>c__DisplayClass4f.<InvokeActionMethodFilterAsynchronously>b__49()
NHibernate.Util.ADOExceptionReporter - While preparing SELECT this_.Id as Id236_2_, this_.Number as Number236_2_,...<blah blah blah>
NHibernate.Util.ADOExceptionReporter - The connection object can not be enlisted in transaction scope.
So I don't think just wrapping your own database calls with a transaction object will help. The innards of Orchard would have to modified as well.
Go vote for this issue if you want AsyncControllers supported in Orchard:
https://orchard.codeplex.com/workitem/18012