I have a question about how to do data filtering with RequestFactory in GWT. I am currently working on an application which is backed by a MySQL database. My persistence layer is based on JPA/Hibernate. I am using RequestFactory to query my database for all my listing-related operations.
So for example, I have a Person object : In my PersonRequestContext I have a method which allows me to list persons. The method signature is :
Request<List<PersonProxy>> listPersons(Integer firstResult, Integer maxResults);
As you may have guessed, the corresponding query is something like this :
entityManager.createQuery("SELECT p FROM Person p ORDER BY p.id").setFirstResult(firstResult).setMaxResults(maxResults).getResultList();
Now, I would like to filter the result based on table columns. So I wanted to use some kind of Filter class abstraction to solve it. The problem is that as we all know, it's not possible to pass non-primitive objects in to the requestFactory method.
Have you ever experienced this kind of thing ? And how did you deal with it to solve the problem?
Your assertion that only primitive types can be passed to a Request method is incorrect. See the documentation on transportable types. You can create a ValueProxy hierarchy to model your filters.
Related
Consider you are doing some integration testing, you are storing some bigger entity into db, and then read it back and would like to compare it. Obviously it has some associations as well, but that's just a cherry on top of very unpleasant cake. How do you compare those entities? I saw lot of incorrect ideas and feel, that this has to be written manually. How you guys do that?
Issues:
you cannot use equals/hashcode: these are for natural Id.
you cannot use subclass with fixed equals, as that would test different class and can give wrong results when persisting data as data are handled differently in persistence context.
lot of fields: you don't want to type all comparisons by hand. You want reflection.
#Temporal annotations: you cannot use trivial "reflection equals" approaches, because #Temporal(TIMESTAMP) java.util.Date <> java.sql.Date
associations: typical entity you would like to have properly tested will have several associations, thus tool/approach ideally should support deep comparison. Also cycles in object graph can ruin the fun.
Best solution what I found:
don't use transmogrifying data types (like Date) in JPA entities.
all associations should be initialized in entity, because null <> empty list.
calculate externaly toString via say ReflectionToStringBuilder, and compare those. Reason for that is to allow entity to have its toString, tests should not depend that someone does not change something. Theoretically, toString can be deep, but commons recursive toStringStyle includes object identifier, which ruins it.
I though, that I could use json format to string, but commons support that only for shallow toString, Jackson (without further instructions on entity) fails on cycles over associations
Alternative solution would be actually declaring subclasses with generated id (say lombok) and use some automatic mapping tool (say remondis mapper), with option to overcome differences in Dates/collections.
But I'm listening. Does anyone posses better solution?
I have this situation:
Spring Data JPA: Work with Pageable but with a specific set of fields of the entity
It about to work with Spring Data and working with a specific set of fields of an #Entity
The two suggestions are totally valid for me:
DTO projections
Projection interfaces
Even more, in spring-data-examples appears both together (I know for sample purposes):
CustomerRepository.java
Thus:
When is mandatory use one over the other and why?
Exists a cost of performance one over the other?
Note in the Class-based Projections (DTOs) section says the following:
Another way of defining projections is by using value type DTOs (Data
Transfer Objects) that hold properties for the fields that are
supposed to be retrieved. These DTO types can be used in exactly the
same way projection interfaces are used, except that no proxying
happens and no nested projections can be applied.
Seems the advantages are: except that no proxying happens and no nested projections can be applied
DTO Approach
Pro
Simple and straigt forward
Con
It will result in more code as you have to create DTO class with constructor and getters/setters (unless you utilize Project Lombok to avoid boilerplate
code for DTOs).
No nested projections can be applied.
Projections
Pro
Less code as it uses only interfaces.
Nested projections can be applied
Dynamic projection allows you write one generic repository method to return
different subset of the attributes in entity object based on client's needs.
Con
Spring generates proxy at runtime
Query could return the entire entity object from database to Spring layer though a trimmed version (via Projection) is returned from Spring layer to client. I wasn't sure about this specific disadvantage, hoping someone to edit this answer if necessary.
If you need nested or dynamic projection, you probably want Projection approach rather than DTO approach.
Refer to official Spring doc for details.
I think that DTO was the first possible solution to work with a small set of data from the Entities. Today, many operations can also be made with projections, but you need to be careful with performance. If you see this Janssen's post Entities or DTOs – When should you use which projection? you will note that DTOs have better performance than projections for reading operations.
If you don't have the problem with performance, projections will be more graceful.
We would like to create an OData REST API. Our data model is such that each customer has their own database. All database objects have the same definition across all customer databases, with the exception of a single table.
The customer specific table we will call Contact. When a customer adds a column the system creates a column with a standardised name with a definition translated from options selected by the user in the UI. The user only refers to the column data by a field name they have specified to enable the user to be able to generate friendly queries.
It seems to me that the following approaches could be used to enable OData for the model described:
1) Create an OData open type to cater for the dynamic properties. This has the disadvantage of user requests for a customer not providing an indication of the dynamic properties that can be queried against. Even though they will be known for the user (via token authentication). Also, because dynamic properties are a dictionary, some data pivoting and inefficient query writing would be required. Not sure how to implement the IQueryable handling of query options for the dynamic properties to enable our own custom field querying.
2) Create a POCO class with e.g. 50 properties; CustomField1, CustomField2... Then somehow control which fields are exposed for use in OData calls. We would then include a separate API call to expose the custom field mapping. E.g. custom field friendly name of MobileNumber = CustomField12.
3) At runtime, check to see if column definitions of table changed since last check. If have, generate class specific to customer using CodeDom and register it with OData. Aiming for a unique URL for each customer. E.g. http://domain.name/{customer guid}/odata
I think the ideal for us is option 2. However, the fact the CustomField1 could be an underlying SQL data type of nvarchar, int, decimal, datetime, etc, there are added complications.
Has anyone a working example of how to achieve what has been described, satisfactorily?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Rik
We have run into a similar situation but with our entire dataset being unknown until runtime. Using the ODataConventionModelBuilder and EdmModel classes, you can add properties dynamically to the model at runtime.
I'm not sure whether you will have to manually add all of the properties for this object type even though only some of them are unknown or whether you can add your main object and then add your dynamic ones afterwards, but I guess either would be workable.
If you can get hold of which type of user it is on the server, you could then add only the properties that you are interested in (like option 3 but not having to CodeDom).
There is an example of this kind of untyped OData server in the OData samples here that should get you started: https://github.com/OData/ODataSamples/tree/master/WebApi/v4/ODataUntypedSample
The research we carried out actually posed Option 1 as the most suitable approach for some operations. i.e. Create an SQL view that unpivots the data in a table to a key/value pair of column name/column value for each column in the table. This was suitable for queries returning small datasets. This was far less effort than Option 3 and less confusing for the user than Option 2. The unpivot query converted the field values to nvarchar (string) values and thus meant that filtering in the UI by column value data types was not simple to achieve. (If we decide to implement this ability, I believe this can be achieved by creating a custom attribute that derives from EnablQueryAttribute, marking the controller action with it and manipulate the IQueryable before execution).
However, we wanted to expose a /Contacts/Export endpoint that when called would output the columns from a table with a fixed schema joined on a table with a client specific schema and output to a CSV file. All the while utilising the OData supported filter syntax. One of our customer databases has more than 12 million rows of data and is made up of approximately 30 columns.
To achieve this it looks like our best bet would have been to work with the Microsoft.OData.Core.UriParser.UriQueryExpressionParser class, unfortunately Microsoft in their wisdom have declared this as internal, as well as many of it's dependants.
Walking an abstract syntax tree built from OData supported query options and applying our own visitor to each node to build some dynamic Linq query/SQL seems like a possible solution.
For the time-being we will simply implement a cut-down set of supported $filter criteria without the support for grouping parenthesis.
I am developing a SPA using Angular-Breeze-WebAPI-EntityFramework.
Now Breeze uses the Entity Framework metadata information to create it's own Breeze models. We use this in our application for Breeze validation.
So far, it's all been nice and easy. Now we are having to create a search page (say for querying customers). The search can be by Customer.Name or by Product.Id (which would return a list of customers who have bought that product). The result is a ng-repeater, which displays Customer.Name, Order.LastPlaced etc.
if you are getting confused by the tables and columns, forget that. What I am only trying to get to is that, both the search object and the result object are not 1:1 with Entity tables (or objects). So obviously I feel the need to create a custom object (one for the search and one for the results). My question primarily is where and how do I create that object?
If I create it at the data layer, Breeze would have no idea of the metadata for each of the properties (since it uses EF for that).
I obviously can't create just a JavaScript object, since I will have to query the database (using EF) to search and populate the object.
So where does one create such a custom object (traversing multiple tables) such that Breeze still can figure out the metadata and perform validation and such when the need arises?
Thank you all.
You can create metadata on the client for types that the server either doesn't know about or doesn't have the schema for. See http://www.breezejs.com/documentation/metadata-by-hand.
I'm using DataNucleus as a JPA implementation to store my classes in my web application. I use a set of converters which all have toDTO() and fromDTO().
My issue is, that I want to avoid the whole DB being sent over the wire:
If I lazy load, the converter will try to access ALL the fields, and load then (resulting in very eager loading).
If I don't lazy load, I'll get a huge part of the DB, since user contains groups, and groups contains users, and so on.
Is there a way to explicitly load some fields and leave the others as NULL in my loaded class?
I've tried the DataNucleus docs with no luck.
Your DTOs are probably too fine-grained. i.e. dont plan to have a DTO per JPA entity. If you have to use DTOs then make them more coarse grained and construct them manually.
Recently we have had the whole "to DTO or not to DTO, that is the question" discussion AGAIN. The requirement for them (especially in the context of a JPA app) is often no longer there, but one of the arguments FOR DTOs tends to be that the view has coarser data requirements.
To only load the data you really require, you would need to use a custom select clause containing only these elements that you are about to use for your DTOs. I know how painful this is, especially when it involves joins, which is why I created Blaze-Persistence Entity Views which will take care of making the query efficient.
You define your DTO as an interface with mappings to the entity, using the attribute name as default mapping, this looks very simple and a lot like a subset of an entity, though it doesn't have to. You can use any JPQL expression as mapping for your DTO attributes.