I am using Hibernate Envers in my application to store audit trail data, all audit related information are storing in *_AUD table correctly. However, the data type of rev column in all _AUD table is Integer data type. I am expecting a big int data type because the maximum range of integer data type is 2147483647. Is there a way to change the data type to big int?
By default, the Envers implementation uses an Integer data type for the REV column.
In order to leverage a Long data type, you'll need to supply a custom revision entity with the appropriate annotations. Below is an example that will replace the existing default implementation while using a BIGINT compatible REV column.
#Entity
#RevisionEntity
public class CustomRevisionEntity implements Serializable {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
#RevisionNumber
private Long rev;
#RevisionTimestamp
private Long timestamp;
/* provide getter/setters */
}
NOTE: All audit tables will make their REV column's data type match that of the data type you use in the revision entity class.
There is an open JIRA HHH-6615 to migrate the default implementations to use Long instead of Integer based revisions; however, it does require that we consider upgrade paths as a implementation detail of that issue to account for existing users.
Until then, using a custom revision entity for new implementations is a workaround.
Related
I want to create an entity containing 2 fields that need to be unique in together. One of the fields is a Boolean:
#Entity
public class SoldToCountry {
private String countryId;
private Boolean isInt;
}
For a given String there should never exist more than 2 entries one with isInt:true and the other isInt:false.
I read the doc about #Id but it seems that Boolean is not supported. For me it would also be ok to have a unique constraint spanned over both fields and using a generated id.
What is the best way to get this constraint via JPA?
If your table has really two fields only, and you want they are unique, then they should be the composite PK of the table. Take a look at How to create and handle composite primary key in JPA
If, instead, you have another PK, consider Sebastian's comment.
I want to uniquely identity an entity without using the primary key. So I thought about generating an unique and random value. Moreover, value must be easy to read / manually copy and is expected to be 6 or 7 characters long.
Design
My entity A:
public class A{
// ...
#Column(name="value", unique=true, nullable=false, insertable=false, updatable=false)
private String value;
// ...
public String getValue(){
return value;
}
protected void setValue(String value){
this.value = value;
}
}
represented in the database by the table
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS schema.mytable{
-- ...
value TEXT NOT NULL DEFAULT generate_unique_value_for_mytable(),
-- ...
CONSTRAINT "un_value" UNIQUE (value),
-- ...
}
I thought letting the database handling this and then fetch the value...
Problem
With the current design, value is correctly generated in the database but when JPA fetches A entities, value field is empty.
I cannot remove insertable=false otherwise, it will hit against the NOT NULL constraint
If I remove insertable=false and I put some dummy data, the data overrides the value generated by generate_unique_value_for_mytable()
If I remove everything in the Column annotation, I can save the A entity but value is still empty
Ugly solution
I couldn't find a proof but it looks like having the database generating a value is a bad idea. I do have the same problem for a non-primary key field which is generated by a sequence: I cannot fetch the value from the database.
So my ugly solution is to decorate the create() method of the EJB responsible for A entities:
public class Aejb{
public void create(A entity){
// method kind of ensures randomness
String value = MyUtil.generateRandomValue();
A isThereAnyoneHere = findByValue(value);
while(isThereAnyoneHere != null){
String value = MyUtil.generateRandomValue();
isThereAnyoneHere = findByValue(value);
}
// unicity is ensured
entity.setValue(value);
em.persist(entity);
}
}
Questions
Can I fetch a non-primary key value generated by the database from a JPA entity? Value can be generated by a function or a sequence.
Is there a more elegant solution than my ugly workaround to provide an unique and random value?
Yes.You haven't mentioned your database, but it is possible for
Oracle to return the value inserted via triggers, and have
Eclipselink obtain this value in your model - see
https://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/documentation/2.5/jpa/extensions/a_returninsert.htm
Set the value using a #PrePersist method that will get executed
before the entity is inserted, but if you are relying on one or more database queries, you will run into performance issues, as inserting a new A will be expensive. You might instead just insert the random value and deal with the occasional conflict, and pick some random that has less chance of overlaps, like a UUID.
If I understand correctly, #Generated annotation should do the trick. This annotation sets the value from database DEFAULT field value.
Example:
#Generated(GenerationTime.INSERT)
#Column(name="value", unique=true, nullable=false, insertable=false, updatable=false)
private String value;
However there is a drawback: if you decide to set value of your field in Java, it would be overwritten by Hibernate using the result from DEFAULT in your database.
Self-answer to mark question as closed
Final solution
We finally went for a combination of
Stored procedures: the database will generate the value. The procedure also ensures that the value is unique across the table
Named queries: to fetch the generated value by the procedure. I did not use NamedStoredProcedures because we are using PostgreSQL and PostgreSQL JDBC driver did not support name parameters which raised some problems.
With this configuration, the EJB is sure to have at most one database call to fetch the requested value.
Response to other answers
Here is a summary of the other answers feedback for self-reference and next readers:
Oracle trigger: we're using PostgreSQL :(
UUID: We had the constraint of having our unique and random code human-readable. An end-user is assumed to be able to manually rewrite it. Consequently, we could not have a long String such as an UUID.
PrePersist: Other business actions take place after the code generation in the same transaction which means that those actions need to be redone in case of collision. I'm not very confident about managing JPA exception (transaction scope and so on) so I preferred not to play with it.
#Generated: This is a Hibernate specific feature. We're using EclipseLink
Database Trigger: If code were purely generated at database level, I encountered the same problems of not fetching the value: the value is properly generated as database level but the entity will have the value as null
I have a question about Postgres and GenerationType.Identity vs Sequence
In this example...
#Id
#SequenceGenerator(name="mytable_id_seq",
sequenceName="mytable_id_seq",
allocationSize=1)
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.SEQUENCE,
generator="mytable_id_seq")
I understand that I am specifying a Postgres sequence to use via annotations.
However, I have an id column defined with the 'serial' type, I have read that I can simply use GenerationType.IDENTITY and it will automatically generate a db sequence and use it to auto increment.
If that's the case, I don't see an advantage to using the SEQUENCE annotations unless you are using an integer for an id or have some specific reason to use another sequence you have created. IDENTITY is alot less code and potentially makes it portable across databases.
Is there something I'm missing?
Thanks in advance for the feedback.
If you have a column of type SERIAL, it will be sufficient to annotate your id field with:
#Id #GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.IDENTITY)
This is telling Hibernate that the database will be looking after the generation of the id column. How the database implements the auto-generation is vendor specific and can be considered "transparent" to Hibernate. Hibernate just needs to know that after the row is inserted, there will be an id value for that row that it can retrieve somehow.
If using GenerationType.SEQUENCE, you are telling Hibernate that the database is not automatically populating the id column. Instead, it is Hibernate's responsibility to get the next sequence value from the specified sequence and use that as the id value when inserting the row. So Hibernate is generating and inserting the id.
In the case of Postgres, it happens that defining a SERIAL column is implemented by creating a sequence and using it as a default column value. But it is the database that is populating the id field so using GenerationType.IDENTITY tells Hibernate that the database is handling id generation.
These references may help:
http://docs.jboss.org/hibernate/orm/5.2/userguide/html_single/Hibernate_User_Guide.html#identifiers-generators
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/datatype.html#DATATYPE-SERIAL
From "Pro JPA2" book:
"Another difference, hinted at earlier, between using IDENTITY and other id generation strategies is that the identifier will not be accessible until after the insert has occurred. Although no guarantee is made about the accessibility of the identifier before the transaction has completed, it is at least possible for other types of generation to eagerly allocate the identifier. But when using identity, it is the action of inserting that causes the identifier to be generated. It would be impossible for the identifier to be available before the entity is inserted into the database, and because insertion of entities is most often deferred until commit time, the identifier would not be available until after the transaction has been committed."
I think it can be helpful if you are using the same sequence for more than one table (for example you want a unique identifier for many types of bills) ... also If you want to keep track of the sequence away from the auto generated key
You can find here the solution of updating the PostgreSQL table creation accordingly, in order to work with the GenerationType.IDENTITY option.
Question: Am I somehow able to map two fields of my Entity class to only one Column in the Database?
Scenario: The database is not fully normalized. There exists one Column which contains a composite information. It is not my actual use case, but an comprehensible example might be X- and Y-coordinate of a point in the plane. So the Database may contain a String 12:45 and the Entity class should contain only two integer field x width value 12 and ywith value 45.
Currently the Entity class has just two additional getter and setter for x and y and performs the proper translation. But I am wondering if there is a way to let JPA do this for me magically in the background.
I am already working with custom converter classes, e.g. for a proper mapping between between enums and database columns, but this works only for a "one-to-one" mapping between the field in the Entity class and the column in the database.
Of course it would be the most preferable way to redesign the table in the database, but that's not an option at the moment.
Vendor specific solutions are also fine.
2 Entity fields into one database column can be done fairly simply by specifying JPA use your accessor in the entity to handle the conversion:
#Entity
#Access(AccessType.FIELD)
class myEntity {
#Id
int id;
#Transient
String x;
#Transient
String y;
#Mutable //EclipseLink specific to prevent change tracking issues
#Access(AccessType.PROPERTY)
#Column(name="yourDatabaseFieldName")
private String getCoords() {
return x+":"+y;
}
private void setCoords(String coords) {
//parse the string and set x+y.
}
EclipseLink and Hibernate have transformation mappings that are able to handle the reverse; 2 or more database fields into one java property but this is outside of JPA.
I am reengineering one of my project with JPA which was initially on iBatis.
public class Entity{
//ids and other stuff
String locale;
String text;
}
I was storing locale and text into separate table, which can be achieved via secondary table in JPA.
I am not able to create secondary table with its own ids besides Join
id?
how can I achieve it? If possible then it raises the following
question:
how would I retrieve it back if I create an entity object with locale set to user settings
See,
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Persistence/Tables#Multiple_tables
Otherwise include your exact schema and model and issue.