I use code first approach in my project. In the prject I have classes with MetadataType attribute, which I don't use in my EF model. Class with metadata has some constant public fields (in addition to fields from main type). Now when I tried to query EF it threw exception that in metadata class there fields not mapped... se below in details
class M1
{
int Id;
string Name
}
class M2
{
int Id;
DateTime Date
}
[MetadataType(typeof(PageOFSRevenueMetadata))]
class NotRelatedToModel
{
int Prop1;
int Prop2;
}
class PageOFSRevenueMetadata
{
public const string RuleSet1 = "r1";
public const string RuleSet2 = "r2";
// Data Vaidation Attrs...
int Prop1;
int Prop2;
}
In my context I have mapping only for M1 and M2. In the DB exists table with name 'NotRelatedToModel', but I don't want to use it in my model. I use EF 6
Now when I try to make join query on M1 and M2 it threw below exception
'NotRelatedToModel' contains the following unknown properties or fields: RuleSet1, RuleSet2. Please make sure that the names of these members match the names of the properties on the main type
I can move this static fields to another place and it seems to work, but I would like to know why it is happend ? How the EF code first mapping works ?
Thanks in advance
Related
I am working with Spring Data 2.0.6.RELEASE.
I am working about pagination for performance and presentation purposes.
Here about performance I am talking about that if we have a lot of records is better show them through pages
I have the following and works fine:
interface PersonaDataJpaCrudRepository extends PagingAndSortingRepository<Persona, String> {
}
The #Controller works fine with:
#GetMapping(produces=MediaType.TEXT_HTML_VALUE)
public String findAll(Pageable pageable, Model model){
Through Thymeleaf I am able to apply pagination. Therefore until here the goal has been accomplished.
Note: The Persona class is annotated with JPA (#Entity, Id, etc)
Now I am concerned about the following: even when pagination works in Spring Data about the amount the records, what about of the content of each record?.
I mean: let's assume that Persona class contains 20 fields (consider any entity you want for your app), thus for a view based in html where a report only uses 4 fields (id, firstname, lastname, date), thus we have 16 unnecessary fields for each entity in memory
I have tried the following:
interface PersonaDataJpaCrudRepository extends PagingAndSortingRepository<Persona, String> {
#Query("SELECT p.id, id.nombre, id.apellido, id.fecha FROM Persona p")
#Override
Page<Persona> findAll(Pageable pageable);
}
If I do a simple print in the #Controller it fails about the following:
java.lang.ClassCastException:
[Ljava.lang.Object; cannot be cast to com.manuel.jordan.domain.Persona
If I avoid that the view fails with:
Caused by:
org.springframework.expression.spel.SpelEvaluationException:
EL1008E:
Property or field 'id' cannot be found on object of type
'java.lang.Object[]' - maybe not public or not valid?
I have read many posts in SO such as:
java.lang.ClassCastException: [Ljava.lang.Object; cannot be cast to
I understand the answer and I am agree about the Object[] return type because I am working with specific set of fields.
Is mandatory work with the complete set of fields for each entity? Should I simply accept the cost of memory about the 16 fields in this case that never are used? It for each record retrieved?
Is there a solution to work around with a specific set of fields or Object[] with the current API of Spring Data?
Have a look at Spring data Projections. For example, interface-based projections may be used to expose certain attributes through specific getter methods.
Interface:
interface PersonaSubset {
long getId();
String getNombre();
String getApellido();
String getFecha();
}
Repository method:
Page<PersonaSubset> findAll(Pageable pageable);
If you only want to read a specific set of columns you don't need to fetch the whole entity. Create a class containing requested columns - for example:
public class PersonBasicData {
private String firstName;
private String lastName;
public PersonBasicData(String firstName, String lastName) {
this.firstName = fistName;
this.lastName = lastName;
}
// getters and setters if needed
}
Then you can specify query using #Query annotation on repository method using constructor expression like this:
#Query("SELECT NEW some.package.PersonBasicData(p.firstName, p.lastName) FROM Person AS p")
You could also use Criteria API to get it done programatically:
CriteriaBuilder cb = entityManager.getCriteriaBuilder();
CriteriaQuery<PersonBasicData> query = cb.createQuery(PersonBasicData.class);
Root<Person> person = query.from(Person.class);
query.multiselect(person.get("firstName"), person.get("lastName"));
List<PersonBasicData> results = entityManager.createQuery(query).getResultList();
Be aware that instance of PersonBasicData being created just for read purposes - you won't be able to make changes to it and persist those back in your database as the class is not marked as entity and thus your JPA provider will not work with it.
What is "the kotlin way" to define JPA entity ID?
#Entity
data class User (
#Id #GeneratedValue
var id: Long? = null,
...
)
Or is there any better one to avoid nullable id?
You can use a 0 value rather than a null value.
#Entity
data class User (
#Id #GeneratedValue
var id: Long = 0,
...
)
Autogeneration should still find the next sequence.
Kotlin compiles to Java, which has both, a primitive type long and a Class Long
As per the Java Persistence Specification in section 11.1.21 Id Annotation both can be used for the Id:
The field or property to which the Id annotation is applied should be one
of the following types: any
Java primitive type; any primitive wrapper type; java.lang.String; java.util.Date;
java.sql.Date; java.math.BigDecimal; java.math.BigInteger[109].
There is an advantage in using the Class over the primitive, as null has a more unambiguous meaning. But from the spec both are possible and you have to decide weather you favor Kotlins nullsafety over the the jpa style or the other way around.
Usually, data class is useful to ruturn more that one result from a method , but not for entities (just my opinion).
Sometimes it is not a good idea to set a default value for the id field.
After some time experimenting with Kotlin and entities (actually, with documents for MongoDb, but anyway it has id),
Looks like the better way is to use lateinit var. You can create the top class of entity hierarchy:
open class Identifiable {
lateinit var id: Long // or String or UUID
//explicitly define equals & hash code here
}
But be careful, for equals, hashcode and if you want to provide toString method in heirs, then it is a good idea to provide extra nullable field, something like:
open class Identifiable {
lateinit var id: Long // or String or UUID
val nullableId: Long?
get() {
return if(this::id.isInitialized) id else null
}
//explicitly define equals & hash code here with nullableId
}
class User {
override fun toString() = "User(id=${nullableId})"
}
In this case, you will avoid an exception when you will try to log your created but not saved in DB entity
Here is my entity class:
public class User {
#Id
UserIdentifier userIdentifier;
String name;
}
public class UserIdentifier {
String ssn;
String id;
}
Here is what I am trying to do:
public interface UserRepository extends MongoRepository<User, UserIdentifier>
{
User findBySsn(String ssn);
}
I get an exception message (runtime) saying:
No property ssn found on User!
How can I implement/declare such a query?
According to Spring Data Repositories reference:
Property expressions can refer only to a direct property of the managed entity, as shown in the preceding example. At query creation time you already make sure that the parsed property is a property of the managed domain class. However, you can also define constraints by traversing nested properties.
So, instead of
User findBySsn(String ssn);
the following worked (in my example):
User findByUserIdentifierSsn(String ssn);
I'm using Filehelpers to parse a very wide, fixed format file and want to be able to take the resulting object and load it into a DB using EF. I'm getting a missing key error when I try to load the object into the DB and when I try and add an Id I get a Filehelpers error. So it seems like either fix breaks the other. I know I can map a Filehelpers object to a POCO object and load that but I'm dealing with dozens (sometimes hundreds of columns) so I would rather not have to go through that hassle.
I'm also open to other suggestions for parsing a fixed width file and loading the results into a DB. One option of course is to use an ETL tool but I'd rather do this in code.
Thanks!
This is the FileHelpers class:
public class AccountBalanceDetail
{
[FieldHidden]
public int Id; // Added to try and get EF to work
[FieldFixedLength(1)]
public string RecordNuber;
[FieldFixedLength(3)]
public string Branch;
// Additional fields below
}
And this is the method that's processing the file:
public static bool ProcessFile()
{
var dir = Properties.Settings.Default.DataDirectory;
var engine = new MultiRecordEngine(typeof(AccountBalanceHeader), typeof(AccountBalanceDetail), typeof(AccountBalanceTrailer));
engine.RecordSelector = new RecordTypeSelector(CustomSelector);
var fileName = dir + "\\MOCK_ACCTBAL_L1500.txt";
var res = engine.ReadFile(fileName);
foreach (var rec in res)
{
var type = rec.GetType();
if (type.Name == "AccountBalanceHeader") continue;
if (type.Name == "AccountBalanceTrailer") continue;
var data = rec as AccountBalanceDetail; // Throws an error if AccountBalanceDetail.Id has a getter and setter
using (var ctx = new ApplicationDbContext())
{
// Throws an error if there is no valid Id on AccountBalanceDetail
// EntityType 'AccountBalanceDetail' has no key defined. Define the key for this EntityType.
ctx.AccountBalanceDetails.Add(data);
ctx.SaveChanges();
}
//Console.WriteLine(rec.ToString());
}
return true;
}
Entity Framework needs the key to be a property, not a field, so you could try declaring it instead as:
public int Id {get; set;}
I suspect FileHelpers might well be confused by the autogenerated backing field, so you might need to do it long form in order to be able to mark the backing field with the [FieldHidden] attribute, i.e.,
[FieldHidden]
private int _Id;
public int Id
{
get { return _Id; }
set { _Id = value; }
}
However, you are trying to use the same class for two unrelated purposes and this is generally bad design. On the one hand AccountBalanceDetail is the spec for the import format. On the other you are also trying to use it to describe the Entity. Instead you should create separate classes and map between the two with a LINQ function or a library like AutoMapper.
I met a very strange phenomenon when using dozer in jpa project.
I have a UserSupplier object and a Supplier object.
UserSupplier:
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "supplier_id", nullable = false)
private Supplier supplier;
In my code I first query a UserSupplier List, then convert it to SupplierList.
List<Supplier> supplierList = new ArrayList<>(usList.size());
usList.forEach(us -> supplierList.add(us.getSupplier()));
Then I convert SupplierList to SupplierView List and return it to Caller.
BeanMapper.mapList(supplierList, SupplierView.class);
My dozer configure in these objects like below
Supplier:
#Id
#GeneratedValue
#Mapping("supplierId")
private int id;
SupplierView:
private int supplierId;
Very funny, supplierId in SupplierView always 0(default int value),but other fileds can convert successfully, only id field fail. I don't why is this, why only id field can't convert to supplierId, but other fields could?
For above problem, there are below solutions
1. Change field name (supplierId to id):
Supplier:
// #Mapping("supplierId")
private int id;
SupplierView:
private int id;
but Caller(front-end) have to change code.
2. Change fetchType to eager:
UserSupplier:
#ManyToOne
private Supplier supplier;
After reading dozer documentation, I find some thing. After trying it, I got another solution.
That is add a dozer.properties into classpath, content inside is
org.dozer.util.DozerProxyResolver=org.dozer.util.HibernateProxyResolver
More detail please see
http://dozer.sourceforge.net/documentation/proxyhandling.html
This is probably because JPA uses proxy objects for lazy loading of single entity reference. Proxy object is effectively a subclass of your entity class. I guess that dozer can find #Mapping annotation only on fields declared in the class of given object, and not on fields defined in parent classes. Dozer project states that annotation mapping is experimental. Therefore it is possible that it does not cover mapping class hierarchies well.
I suggest to try configure mapping of supplierId by other means (XML, dozer mapping API) and see if it works. If all fails, you could write a custom MapperAware converter between Supplier and SupplierView. You would map source object to target object using supplied mapper, and finilize it by copying value of id to supplierId.