When I try to remove an entity using Outbound Channel Adapter I always get removing a detached instance exception.
I know that an entity should be retrieved and deleted in the same transaction to avoid this exception, but how can I achieve it with Spring Integration?
To demonstrate the problem I modified the JPA sample:
PersonService.java
public interface PersonService {
...
void deletePerson(Person person);
}
Main.java
private static void deletePerson(final PersonService service) {
final List<Person> people = service.findPeople();
Person p1 = people.get(0);
service.deletePerson(p1);
}
spring-integration-context.xml
<int:gateway id="personService"
service-interface="org.springframework.integration.samples.jpa.service.PersonService"
default-request-timeout="5000" default-reply-timeout="5000">
<int:method name="createPerson" request-channel="createPersonRequestChannel"/>
<int:method name="findPeople" request-channel="listPeopleRequestChannel"/>
<int:method name="deletePerson" request-channel="deletePersonChannel"/>
</int:gateway>
<int:channel id="deletePersonChannel"/>
<int-jpa:outbound-channel-adapter entity-manager-factory="entityManagerFactory"
channel="deletePersonChannel" persist-mode="DELETE" >
<int-jpa:transactional transaction-manager="transactionManager" />
</int-jpa:outbound-channel-adapter>
When I call deletePerson I get the exception:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IllegalArgumentException:
Removing a detached instance
org.springframework.integration.samples.jpa.Person#1001
UPDATE:
Apparently I should've chosen a sample closer to my actual project, because here you can just create a new transaction programmatically and wrap both retrieve and delete function calls in it, as Artem did.
In my project I have a transformer connected to an outbound-channel-adapter. The transformer retrieves an entity and the outbound-channel-adapter removes it. How can I get the transformer and the outbound-channel-adapter to use the same transaction in this case?
To get it worked you should wrap all operations in the deletePerson to transaction, e.g.
private static void deletePerson(final PersonService service) {
new new TransactionTemplate(transactionManager)
.execute(new TransactionCallbackWithoutResult() {
protected void doInTransactionWithoutResult(TransactionStatus status) {
final List<Person> people = service.findPeople();
Person p1 = people.get(0);
service.deletePerson(p1);
}
});
}
In this case you should somehow provide to your method transactionManager bean too.
UPDATE:
I shown you a sample for use-case in the original question.
Now re. <transformer> -> <jpa:outbound-channel-adapter>.
In this you should understand where your message flow is started:
If it is <inbound-channel-adapter> with poller, so just make the <poller> <transactional>
If it <gateway>, who call <transformer>, so it's just enough to mark gateway's method with #Transactional
Here is one more transactional advice trick: Keep transaction within Spring Integration flow
In all cases you should get rid of <transactional> from your <jpa:outbound-channel-adapter>
Related
1) Contextualization:
In order, to have a complete test-isolation-state in all test of my Test-Class;
I would like to have a new-instance-repository(DAO) for each individual test;
My Repository is a Interface, thats the why I can not simply instantiate that.
My Goal is:
Run all tests 'Parallelly', meaning 'at the same time';
That's the why, I need individual/multiple instances of Repository(DAO) in each test;
Those multiple instances will make sure that the tests' conclusion would not interfere on those that still is running.
Below is the code for the above situation:
1.1) Code:
Current working status: working, BUT with ths SAME-REPOSITORY-INSTANCE;
Current behaviour:
The tests are not stable;
SOMETIMES, they interfere in each other;
meaning, the test that finalize early, destroy the Repository Bean that still is being used, for the test that is still running.
public class ServiceTests2 extends ConfigTests {
private List<Customer> customerList;
private Flux<Customer> customerFlux;
#Lazy
#Autowired
private ICustomerRepo repo;
private ICustomerService service;
#BeforeEach
public void setUp() {
service = new CustomerService(repo);
Customer customer1 = customerWithName().create();
Customer customer2 = customerWithName().create();
customerList = Arrays.asList(customer1,customer2);
customerFlux = service.saveAll(customerList);
}
#Test
#DisplayName("Save")
public void save() {
StepVerifier.create(customerFlux)
.expectNextSequence(customerList)
.verifyComplete();
}
#Test
#DisplayName("Find: Objects")
public void find_object() {
StepVerifier
.create(customerFlux)
.expectNext(customerList.get(0))
.expectNext(customerList.get(1))
.verifyComplete();
}
}
2) The ERROR happening:
This ERROR happens in the failed-Tests:
3) Question:
How Can I create multiple instances of Repository
Even if, it being a Interface(does not allow instantation)?
In order, to have a COMPLETE TEST-ISOLATION
Meaning: ONE different instance of Repository in each test?
Thanks a lot for any help or idea
You can use the #DirtiesContext annotation on the test class that modifies the application context.
Java Doc
Spring documentation
By default, this will mark the application context as dirty after the entire test class is run. If you would like to mark the context as dirty after a single test method, then you can either annotate the test method instead or set the classMode property to AFTER_EACH_TEST_METHOD at your class level annotation.
#DirtiesContext(classMode = ClassMode.AFTER_EACH_TEST_METHOD)
When an application context is marked dirty, it is removed from the
testing framework's cache and closed; thus the underlying Spring
container is rebuilt for any subsequent test that requires a context
with the same set of resource locations.
I'm currently working on a project and I want to see what damage it can do if I don't embrace my code with try-catch block when persisting object into database. Here is my code down below that i use as test.
public class NewEventServiceBean implements NewEventService {
#PersistenceContext(name = "example")
EntityManager manager;
#Resource
private UserTransaction userTransaction;
#Override
public void createNewEvent(String title, String content) throws Exception
{
userTransaction.begin();
Event event = new Event();
Content cont = new Content();
cont.setContent(content);
event.setTitle(title);
event.setCont(cont);
manager.persist(event);
manager.persist(cont);
userTransaction.commit();
}
In the database i have this Event table that has a foreign key to Content table.
And my question is if It's possible that Event object is persisted in to the database even if I cause something wrong when persisting the content class. Or what is the disadvantages of not embracing the code with try catch and rollback?
I've tried to cause an error when persisting the content object, but the Event is not persisted into the datbase even if everything is correct in that class.
When attempting to edit a new (proxy) entity using RequestFactoryEditorDriver.edit() I am getting the following error: "Exception caught: Attempting to edit an EntityProxy previously edited by another RequestContext". I am fairly sure that this is a result of my misunderstanding of the request factory/editor framework architecture. Here is the editor code that I think pertains to this problem:
public class OrgMaintenanceWidget extends Composite implements Editor<IOrgProxy> {
... other fields ...
private IOrgEditorDriver _orgEditorDriver;
interface IOrgEditorDriver extends RequestFactoryEditorDriver<IOrgProxy, OrgMaintenanceWidget> {}
public OrgMaintenanceWidget(final IClientFactory clientFactory) {
... widget initialization ...
_orgEditorDriver = GWT.create(IOrgEditorDriver.class);
_orgEditorDriver.initialize(_clientFactory.getRequestFactory().getEventBus(),
_clientFactory.getRequestFactory(), this);
}
#UiHandler("newButton")
public void onNewButtonClick(final ClickEvent clickEvent) {
_org = _clientFactory.getCache().getOrgCache().newOrg();
_orgEditorDriver.edit(_org, _clientFactory.getRequestFactory().orgRequestContext());
}
...
}
It's the "_orgEditorDriver.edit()" line that causes the exception. The "newOrg()" method is:
public IOrgProxy newOrg() {
return _clientFactory.getRequestFactory().orgRequestContext().create(IOrgProxy.class);
}
The RequestFactory is simply:
public interface IRequestFactory extends RequestFactory {
IOrgRequestContext orgRequestContext();
}
I am sure that I'm missing something fundamental about editing a new entity. When I edit an existing entity everything is fine ... the UI components are populated automatically, and flushing the editor back to the entity works very nicely. Here's the code that initiates editing for an existing entity:
#UiHandler("newButton")
public void onNewButtonClick(final ClickEvent clickEvent) {
_org = _clientFactory.getCache().getOrgCache().newOrg();
_orgEditorDriver.edit(_org, _clientFactory.getRequestFactory().orgRequestContext());
}
Any help would be greatly appreciated, and I'll try to publish any lessons learned.
This code:
_clientFactory.getRequestFactory().orgRequestContext().create(IOrgProxy.class);
Means:
Create new orgRequestContext()
Create new IOrgProxy using this context
Edit new IOrgProxy using this context, because as docs say: "Returns a new mutable proxy that this request can carry to the server, perhaps to be persisted.", it means that the proxy is edited by this request.
This code:
_orgEditorDriver.edit(_org, _clientFactory.getRequestFactory().orgRequestContext());
Means:
Again, create new orgRequestContext() (because each invocation of getRequestFactory().orgRequestContext() provides new instance of orgRequestContext()
"Start driving the Editor and its sub-editors with data." as docs say. But as a part of it, use passed orgRequestContext() to edit passed IOrgProxy instance, so that the proxy is editable.
Because the proxy was already edited while created by other RequestContext, you get the exception, because there is fundamental rule in RequestFactory, that proxy can be edited only by one RequestContext.
See also this thread.
I think you can't create an object with one RequestContext and then edit it with another one.
So you can solve this in two ways:
Persist the created object with the RequestContext you used when you created the object. The save method should return the persisted object and this persisted object can be passed to the editor with a fresh new RequestContext
Somewhere save the RequestContext you used for creating the object and pass it to the edit function of your Driver
Solution two could look something like this:
#UiHandler("newButton")
public void onNewButtonClick(final ClickEvent clickEvent) {
IOrgRequestContext ctx = _clientFactory.getRequestFactory().orgRequestContext();
_org = ctx.create(IOrgProxy.class);
_orgEditorDriver.edit(_org,ctx );
}
I am working in J2EE 5 using JPA, I have a working solution but I'm looking to clean up the structure.
I am using EntityListeners on some of the JPA objects I am persisting, the listeners are fairly generic but depend on the beans implementing an interface, this works great if you remember to add the interface.
I have not been able to determine a way to tie the EntityListener and the Interface together so that I would get an exception that lead in the right direction, or even better a compile time error.
#Entity
#EntityListener({CreateByListener.class})
public class Note implements CreatorInterface{
private String message;....
private String creator;
....
}
public interface CreatorInterface{
public void setCreator(String creator);
}
public class CreateByListener {
#PrePersist
public void dataPersist(CreatorInterface data){
SUser user = LoginModule.getUser();
data.setCreator(user.getName());
}
}
This functions exactly the way I want it to, except when a new class is created and it uses the CreateByListener but does not implement the CreatorInterface.
When this happens a class cast exception is thrown somewhere deep from within the JPA engine and only if I happen to remember this symptom can I figure out what went wrong.
I have not been able to figure a way to require the interface or test for the presence of the interface before the listener would be fired.
Any ideas would be appreciated.
#PrePersist
public void dataPersist(Object data){
if (!(data instanceof CreatorInterface)) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("The class "
+ data.getClass()
+ " should implement CreatorInterface");
}
CreatorInterface creatorInterface = (CreatorInterface) data;
SUser user = LoginModule.getUser();
creatorInterface.setCreator(user.getName());
}
This does basically the same thing as what you're doing, but at least you'll have a more readable error message indicating what's wrong, instead of the ClassCastException.
I just come from my tiny nice JavaSE/Guice world and am currently discovering the path of "carried by the container"-EE6. After having some trouble with Glassfish3.1, I just switched to JBoss and am now facing a problem that shouldnt be one.
As infrastructural assisting class, im trying to create a generic repository/DAO for any kind of entity. In a very simple manner, this might look like this one.
public class Repository<E, K extends Serializable & Comparable<K>> {
private final Instance<EntityManager> entityManagerInstance;
protected final Class<E> getDomainObjectClass() {
return domainObjectClass;
}
private final Class<E> domainObjectClass;
protected final EntityManager getEntityManager() {
return entityManagerInstance.get();
}
#Inject
public Repository(Instance<EntityManager> entityManageryProvider, Provider<E> domainObjectProvider) {
//This is a dirty hack, sadly :(
domainObjectClass = (Class<E>)domainObjectProvider.get().getClass();
this.entityManagerInstance = entityManageryProvider;
}
public final void persist(E domainObject) {
final EntityManager em = getEntityManager();
em.persist(domainObject);
}
public final Collection<E> getAllEntities() {
final EntityManager em = getEntityManager();
final CriteriaBuilder cb = em.getCriteriaBuilder();
final CriteriaQuery<E> query = cb.createQuery(getDomainObjectClass());
final List<E> result = em.createQuery(query).getResultList();
return Collections.unmodifiableList(result);
}
public final E find(K id) {
Preconditions.checkNotNull(id);
final EntityManager em = getEntityManager();
return em.find(getDomainObjectClass(), id);
}
// [...]
}
Now there may be a bean that does not require entity-dependent query capabilities but just a repository of a certain entity type, like (might be a test case):
public class DomainObjectARepositoryTest{
#Inject
Repository<DomainObjectA, PersistableUUID> domainObjectARepository;
#Test
public void testMitarbeitererstellung() {
for (DomainObjectA a : domainObjectARepository.getAllEntities()) {
// do cool stuff
}
}
}
Unfortunatly Weld does not seem to like this kind of generic injection. At deployment time, I get the following error:
state=Create: org.jboss.weld.exceptions.DeploymentException: WELD-001408 Unsatisfied dependencies for type [Repository<DomainObjectA , PersistableUUID>] with qualifiers [#Default] at injection point [[field] #Inject sompackage.DomainObjectARepositoryTest.domainObjectARepository]
Am I missing something or did they just forgot to implement generic injects? As far as I understand the generic stuff, it is erasured after compiletime anyway - even this worked so fine in guice3 so far.
Kind regards,
avi
edit: found a comment by garvin king that this behavior is in the spec, but not implemented in weld, (staement was in june 2009)
That's rather a long comment than a complete answer to your question, but might point you in the right direction:
I'm following the discussions in seam-dev & weld-dev since quite some time, and do not remember that anything like this ever popped up. So my guess would be that it hasn't been on the agenda ever since Gavin commented about it.
What you can do relatively easy to verify this assumption:
(a) Obtain a reference to the BeanManager and query it for the relevant bean type (or just for Object to be on the save side), of course you will have to remove #Inject in DomainObjectARepositoryTest in order to get the application started.
(b) Register an extension and listen to ProcessBean to what comes up during the deployment. That would be my suggested way to go, you'll find more information here.
With that outcome you should definitely be able to tell if there are any bean types Repository<E, K extends Serializable & Comparable<K>> hanging around :-)
Would be cool if you'd report back here with the results and also considered filing a Jira issue in the negative case.