I'm a bit stuck and don't understand what's going on.
This one doesn't work
#Entity
#DynamicInsert
#DynamicUpdate
#SelectBeforeUpdate
#Table
class Entity {
#Column(nullable = false)
var owner: String = _
}
val myEntity = new Entity() {
owner = "some owner 1"
}
session.persist(myEntity)
Hibernate throws exception:
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unknown entity:persistence.dao.EntityDaoTest$$anonfun$13$$anonfun$14$$anon$5
at org.hibernate.internal.SessionImpl.firePersist(SessionImpl.java:777)
This one works:
val myEntity = new Entity()
entity.owner = "some owner 1"
session.persist(myEntity)
Why? Why does hibernate don't recognize my Entity instance?
UPD:
#Sheinbergon, thanks, it's clear. I completely forgot that annotations are lost. Is there any possibility to set entity fields with some shortcut?
writing
val myEntity = new MyEntity()
myEntity.owner = "some owner"
myEntity.someOtherProperty = "value"
is super boring
One more question
This one works:
val parent = new Parent
parent.owner = "Our parent"
parent.addChild(new Child() {
name = "First parent's child"
addGrandChild(new GrandChild() {
name = "Grand child name"
addGrandGrandChild(new GrandGrandChild() {
name = "Grand Grand child name"
address = new Address() {
id = 1L
}
})
})
})
Why? Child, GrandChild, GrandGrandChild also created anonymously.
addChild, addGrandChild, addGrandGrandChild are just list mutators.
def addChild(child: Child): Unit = {
if (children == null) {
children = new util.ArrayList[Child]()
}
if (Option(child.parent).isEmpty) {
child.parent = this
}
children.add(child)
}
What you are doing here is instantiating a class anonymously in Scala , and well... that creates an anonymous implementation of your class Entity ( like instantiating an interface anonymously in Java).
you can see it by printing the class name - println(myEntity.getClass) in both cases
Annotations applied to the original class do not apply to the anonymous one (reflection can still find them in the super class, but that's up to the code scanning them) and I guess that's why you're getting the various JPA exceptions
In response to your added sub-questions
Regarding a shortcut - why don't you use companion objects for factories or turn this class into a case class (with defaults), allowing for nicer, more flexible initialization.
Regarding the second object graph(and assuming eachof your classes are annotated) - again it depends on how the reflective code treats the objects it scans. it's possible ( and more likely, given that it won't scan each member of the collection for annotations ) it takes annotation definitions from the erased type ( possible to get it's FQDN class name as ParameterizedType in Java's reflection API) of the collection and not from the actual members of the collection and that's why it works.
I'm not really sure what it does about field definitions though (they are only present in the "super" class), but there's no "magic" here, just plain old reflection scans.
Related
I have Pet, Dog and Cat entity classes. Dog and Cat classes extend Pet.
Also I have PetDTO, DogDTO and CatDTO annotated with #JsonSubtype so Jackson resolves well the class of the dtos.
I want to write a mapper using MapStruct that takes a PetDTO entity (can be a DogDTO or a CatDTO) and returns a Dog or a Cat.
For me in this case, the main goal of using a mapping library is to avoid awful code using instanceof.
Any idea? Thanks!
Not currently possible out-of-the-box - see this ticket in mapstruct's GitHub: #366 Support for abstract class mapping or classes with base class. You can try to push it there or maybe contribute this feature yourself. Looks like a reasonable feature to ask for.
I guess that with the current state of affairs this is your best option:
#Mapper
public interface PetMapper {
default PetDTO toPetDto(Pet pet) {
if (pet instanceof Dog) {
return toDogDTO((Dog) pet);
}
if (pet instanceof Cat) {
return toCatDTO((Cat) pet);
}
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unknown subtype of Pet");
}
default Pet toPetEntity(PetDTO petDTO) {
if (petDTO instanceof DogDTO) {
return toDogEntity((DogDTO) petDTO);
}
if (petDTO instanceof CatDTO) {
return toCatEntity((CatDTO) petDTO);
}
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unknown subtype of PetDTO");
}
DogDTO toDogDTO(Dog dog);
Dog toDogEntity(DogDTO dogDTO);
CatDTO toCatDTO(Cat cat);
Cat toCatEntity(CatDTO catDTO);
}
The way I ended up implementing a Mapper for a similar case as above was using a combination of a switch-type, with MapStruct Update Existing and creation Mappers.
In my case a property on the source object dictated the subclass we had to generate.
I initially had different mappers for each subtype, but the duplication of the common mapped properties just seemed wrong. So I came up with the following, leveraging the ability of MapStruct to use updating mappers in order to tackle the common parent type properties:
import org.mapstruct.*;
#Mapper
#Named("QualifierPetMapper")
public interface PetMapper {
#Named("DelegatingPetMapper")
#BeanMapping(ignoreByDefault = true)
default PetTarget mapPet(PetSource petSource) {
switch (petSource.getPetType()) {
case "DOG":
DogTarget dogTarget = mapDog(petSource);
updatePet(dogTarget, petSource);
return (dogTarget);
case "CAT":
CatTarget catTarget = mapCat(petSource);
updatePet(catTarget, petSource);
return (catTarget);
default:
throw new CustomException("Unsupported Pet type: "+ petSource.getPetType());
}
}
#BeanMapping(ignoreByDefault = true)
// Specific mappings for Dog
#Mapping(target = "dogfood.name", source = "dogfoodName")
DogTarget mapDog(PetSource petSource);
#BeanMapping(ignoreByDefault = true)
// Specific mappings for Cat
#Mapping(target = "fish.name", source = "favoriteFish")
CatTarget mapCat(PetSource petSource);
#Named("RootPetMapper")
#BeanMapping(ignoreByDefault = true)
// Common properties for Pet
#Mapping(target = "weight.value", source = "weightValue")
#Mapping(target = "name.value", source = "petName")
#Mapping(target = "color", source = "mainColor")
void updatePet(#MappingTarget PetTarget petTarget, PetSource petSource);
}
I´ve been looking for how avoid return a list without the attribute lazyLoader, I want to continue using the lazyLoader but I don´t want return the attribute when I return the whole list of my entity from my controller
I´m working with .NET core.
[
{
"lazyLoader": {},
"id": "id1"
"name": "name"
},
{
"lazyLoader": {},
"id": "id2",
"name": "name2"
}
]
You can do a select of you collection only retrieving the rest of the data.
That way your objects will not have the Navigation property at all.
db.YourCollection.Where(your condition)Select(x => new { id = x.id , name = x.name } );
In Entity Framework, if you have an object where one or more of its properties use lazy loading, check its runtime type name using GetType().Name. For an object of a Car class, for example, you will notice that the runtime type is actually something called CarProxy, which is a temporary in-memory type created by Entity Framework using reflection. This "fake" proxy class's base type is Car, and has all the original Car properties, but includes an extra one called LazyLoader for properties that may need it.
If you do further checking on this "fake" CarProxy type, you will also see that Assembly.IsDynamic = true, which is indicative that the class was created dynamically using reflection (see documentation):
var TheCar = DBContext.Cars.Find(1);
Console.WriteLine(TheCar.GetType().Assembly.IsDynamic.ToString()); //will echo "true"
Luckily, Newtonsoft.Json has an override on the JsonConvert.SerializeObject() method that allows us to provide a base type, so that the resulting JSON doesn't contain properties that don't exist in that type. So, to eliminate the LazyLoader property, just provide the object's BaseType as the type parameter:
var TheCar = DBContext.Cars.Find(1);
var TheJSON = Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.SerializeObject(TheCar, TheCar.GetType().BaseType);
To make sure you don't get any circular reference loops when serializing (a very high probability when using lazy loading), call the serializer with the following setting:
var TheCar = DBContext.Cars.Find(1);
var Settings = new Newtonsoft.Json.JsonSerializerSettings
{
ReferenceLoopHandling = Newtonsoft.Json.ReferenceLoopHandling.Ignore
};
var TheJSON = Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.SerializeObject(TheCar, TheCar.GetType().BaseType, Settings);
Note: This may only work on the first level deep when the serializer travels through the object. If there are yet more lazy-loading child properties of the object you provide to the serializer, the "LazyLoader" property may appear again. I haven't tested it so I can't say for sure.
I know this is old, but add
public boolean ShouldSerializeLazyLoader() { return false; }
to all the classes down the tree of the ones you want to serialize, and you will get a lazyloader free JSON.
Ref.: https://www.newtonsoft.com/json/help/html/ConditionalProperties.htm
The checked answer for this question is just working for the root object, if we have many nested lazyloaded objects, this solution will not work.
Although the answer of #Marcello-Barbiani is correct but it is not a good way to add this function to all entities we have.
The best way is create a new ContractResolver derived from DefaultContractResolver and check if property is Lazyloader then skip it as below:
public class NonLazyloaderContractResolver : DefaultContractResolver
{
public new static readonly NonLazyloaderContractResolver Instance = new NonLazyloaderContractResolver();
protected override JsonProperty CreateProperty(MemberInfo member, MemberSerialization memberSerialization)
{
JsonProperty property = base.CreateProperty(member, memberSerialization);
if (property.PropertyName == "LazyLoader")
{
property.ShouldSerialize = i => false;
}
return property;
}
}
after that adding above class pass it through JsonSerializerSettings while serializing the object:
var json = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(newProduct, new JsonSerializerSettings() {
ContractResolver = new NonLazyloaderContractResolver(),
ReferenceLoopHandling = ReferenceLoopHandling.Ignore,
DefaultValueHandling = DefaultValueHandling.Ignore });
and finally if you are using asp.net core or asp.net core webapi add this contract as default contractresolver in startup.cs file:
services.AddMvc()
.SetCompatibilityVersion(CompatibilityVersion.Version_2_1)
.AddJsonOptions(options =>
{
options.SerializerSettings.ContractResolver = new NonLazyloaderContractResolver();
options.SerializerSettings.ReferenceLoopHandling = Newtonsoft.Json.ReferenceLoopHandling.Ignore;
});
I have a list List<Payment> which I'd like to map to another list List<PaymentPlan>. These types look like this:
public class Payment {
#XmlElement(name = "Installment")
#JsonProperty("Installment")
private List<Installment> installments = new ArrayList<>();
#XmlElement(name = "OriginalAmount")
#JsonProperty("OriginalAmount")
private BigDecimal originalAmount;
//getters setters, more attributes
}
and....
public class PaymentPlan {
//(Installment in different package)
private List<Installment> installments;
#XmlElement(name = "OriginalAmount")
#JsonProperty("OriginalAmount")
private BigDecimal originalAmount;
//getters setters, more attributes
}
I expect that something like this is working...
#Mappings({
#Mapping(//other mappings...),
#Mapping(source = "payments", target = "paymentInformation.paymentPlans")
})
ResultResponse originalResponseToResultResponse(OrigResponse originalResponse);
...but I get:
Can't map property java.util.List<Payment> to java.util.List<PaymentPlan>.
Consider to declare/implement a mapping method java.util.List<PaymentPlan> map(java.util.List<Payment> value);
I don't know how to apply this information. First I though I need to declare some extra mapping (in the same mapper class) for the lists, so MapStruct knows how to map each field of the List types like this:
#Mappings({
#Mapping(source = "payment.originalAmount", target = "paymentInformation.paymentPlan.originalAmount")
})
List<PaymentPlan> paymentToPaymentPlan(List<Payment> payment);
...but I get error messages like
The type of parameter "payment" has no property named "originalAmount".
Obviously I do something completely wrong, since it sound like it does not even recognize the types of the List.
How can I basically map from one List to another similar List? Obviously I somehow need to combine different mapping strategies.
btw: I know how to do it with expression mapping, like...
#Mapping(target = "paymentPlans",expression="java(Helper.mapManually(payments))")
but I guess MapStruct can handle this by iself.
I presume you are using version 1.1.0.Final. Your extra mapping is correct, the only difference is that you need to define a mapping without the lists MapStruct will then use that to do the mapping (the example message is a bit misleading for collections).
PaymentPlan paymentToPaymentPlan(Payment payment);
You don't even need the #Mappings as they would be automatically mapped. You might also need to define methods for the Instalment (as they are in different packages).
If you switch to 1.2.0.CR2 then MapStruct can automatically generate the methods for you.
Using mapstruct v1.0.0.Final, I'm facing an ambiguous mapping exception trying to map from SourceType to TargetType:
class TargetType {
List<TargetTypeChild> children;
boolean allResults;
}
class SourceType {
List<SourceTypeChild> children;
boolean allResults;
}
The mapping that I'm using is:
#Mapper(uses = B.class)
interface A {
#Mapping(target = "children", source = "children", qualifiedBy = ToTargetType.class)
TargetType toTargetType (SourceType source);
#Mapping(target = "children", source = "children", qualifiedBy = ToTargetTypeNoDetails.class)
TargetType toTargetTypeNoDetails (SourceType source);
}
interface B {
#Qualifier
#Target(ElementType.METHOD)
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.SOURCE)
public #interface ToTargetType {}
#Qualifier
#Target(ElementType.METHOD)
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.SOURCE)
public #interface ToTargetTypeNoDetails {}
#ToTargetType
#IterableMapping(qualifiedBy = ToTargetType.class)
List<TargetTypeChild> withDetails(List<SourceTypeChild> value);
#ToTargetTypeNoDetails
#IterableMapping(qualifiedBy = ToTargetTypeNoDetails.class)
List<TargetTypeChild> noDetails(List<SourceTypeChild> value);
#ToTargetType
#Mappings({
#Mapping(target = "details", source = "details"),
...rest of mapping
})
TargetTypeChild toTargetTypeChild(SourceTypeChild source);
#ToTargetTypeNoDetails
#Mappings({
#Mapping(target = "details", ignore = true),
...rest of mapping
})
TargetTypeChild toTargetTypeChildNoDetails(SourceTypeChild source);
}
This does not compile, giving the following exception in both interface A's methods:
Ambiguous mapping methods found for mapping property "List children" to List: List noDetails(List arg0), List withDetails(List arg0).
There is one workaround to this: put both interface A's methods in interface B. That compiles and works. But I need to separate them for business reasons.
Could anyone explain why the first approach doesn't work and the workaround does?
As a bonus question, if I only code 1 method for mapping (no qualifiers), I don't need to even declare the #IterableMapping method, mapstruct knows how to find the "children" methods.
Why?
Thank you all!
Anyone could explain why the first approach doesn't work and the workaround does?
Your qualifier annotations must at least have retention policy CLASS, only then they will be discovered. That's not needed if everything is defined within the same source file, in which case SOURCE is enough.
As a bonus question, if I only code 1 method for mapping (no qualifiers)
MapStruct will generate (private) iterable mapping methods as needed. Actually it should work also in your original case, seems like that's a glitch we need to fix. I've filed issue #707 for this.
Thanks for reporting this!
I have a domain object which has a collection of primitive values, which represent the primary keys of another domain object ("Person").
I have a Wicket component that takes IModel<List<Person>>, and allows you to view, remove, and add Persons to the list.
I would like to write a wrapper which implements IModel<List<Person>>, but which is backed by a PropertyModel<List<Long>> from the original domain object.
View-only is easy (Scala syntax for brevity):
class PersonModel(wrappedModel: IModel[List[Long]]) extends LoadableDetachableModel[List[Person]] {
#SpringBean dao: PersonDao =_
def load: List[Person] = {
// Returns a collection of Persons for each id
wrappedModel.getObject().map { id: Long =>
dao.getPerson(id)
}
}
}
But how might I write this to allow for adding and removing from the original List of Longs?
Or is a Model not the best place to do this translation?
Thanks!
You can do something like this:
class PersonModel extends Model<List<Person>> {
private transient List<Person> cache;
private IModel<List<String>> idModel;
public PersonModel( IModel<List<String>> idModel ) {
this.idModel = idModel;
}
public List<Person> getObject() {
if ( cache == null ) {
cache = convertIdsToPersons( idModel.getObject() );
return cache;
}
public void setObject( List<Person> ob ) {
cache = null;
idModel.setObject( convertPersonsToIds( ob ) );
}
}
This isn't very good code but it shows the general idea. One thing you need to consider is how this whole thing will be serialised between requests, you might be better off extending LoadableDetachableModel instead.
Another thing is the cache: it's there to avoid having to convert the list every time getObject() is called within a request. You may or may not need it in practice (depends on a lot of factors, including the speed of the conversion), but if you use it, it means that if something else is modifying the underlying collection, the changes may not be picked up by this model.
I'm not quite sure I understand your question and I don't understand the syntax of Scala.
But, to remove an entity from a list, you can provide a link that simply removes it using your dao. You must be using a repeater to populate your Person list so each repeater entry will have its own Model which can be passed to the deletion link.
Take a look at this Wicket example that uses a link with a repeater to select a contact. You just need to adapt it to delete your Person instead of selecting it.
As for modifying the original list of Longs, you can use the ListView.removeLink() method to get a link component that removes an entry from the backing list.