I am doing Auditing for my Controller, Service and Dao layer. I have three Around aspect functions for Controller, Service and Dao respectively. I use a custom annotation which if present on the Controller method will invoke an Around aspect function. Inside the annotation I set a property which I wish to pass from the Controller Around function to the Service around function inside the Aspect class.
public #interface Audit{
String getType();
}
I will set the value of this getType from an interface.
#Around("execution(* com.abc.controller..*.*(..)) && #annotation(audit)")
public Object controllerAround(ProceedingJoinPoint pjp, Audit audit){
//read value from getType property of Audit annotation and pass it to service around function
}
#Around("execution(* com.abc.service..*.*(..))")
public Object serviceAround(ProceedingJoinPoint pjp){
// receive the getType property from Audit annotation and execute business logic
}
How can I pass an object between two Around functions?
Aspects are, by default, singleton objects. However, there are different instantiation models, which could be useful in use cases like yours. Using a percflow(pointcut) instantiation model, you could store the value of the annotation in your controller around advice and retrieve it in your service around advice. The following is just an example on how it would look like:
#Aspect("percflow(controllerPointcut())")
public class Aspect39653654 {
private Audit currentAuditValue;
#Pointcut("execution(* com.abc.controller..*.*(..))")
private void controllerPointcut() {}
#Around("controllerPointcut() && #annotation(audit)")
public Object controllerAround(ProceedingJoinPoint pjp, Audit audit) throws Throwable {
Audit previousAuditValue = this.currentAuditValue;
this.currentAuditValue = audit;
try {
return pjp.proceed();
} finally {
this.currentAuditValue = previousAuditValue;
}
}
#Around("execution(* com.abc.service..*.*(..))")
public Object serviceAround(ProceedingJoinPoint pjp) throws Throwable {
System.out.println("current audit value=" + currentAuditValue);
return pjp.proceed();
}
}
Related
Given I have a factory class responsible for constructing instances of a certain service that has constructor parameters that can only be resolved at runtime, is there a way to leverage container-driven decoration?
Consider the following class which relies on a parameter that is only defined at runtime:
interface IFooService
{
void DoServicyStuff();
}
class MyFooService : IFooService
{
public MyFooService(string somePeskyRuntimeArgument)
{
this.peskyValue = somePeskyRuntimeArgument;
}
public void DoServicyStuff()
{
// do some stuff here with the peskyValue...
}
}
Since the value can only be provided at runtime, we need to move away from the constructor injection and into a method-level parameter passing. This is commonly achieved using a factory implementation like this:
interface IFooServiceFactory
{
IFooService CreateService(string heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter);
}
class FooServiceFactory : IFooServiceFactory
{
public IFooService CreateService(string heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter)
{
return new MyFooService(heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter);
}
}
While this works fine if the intent is to just abstract away the construction of the service, it poses a challenge to decorate the IFooService instance.
For scenarios where no runtime parameter is involved, this can be easily achieved by tapping into the container to provide our service for us. The example below uses the Scrutor library to decorate the interface with a logging decorator implementation:
class FooServiceFactory : IFooServiceFactory
{
private readonly IServiceProvider serviceProvider;
public FooServiceFactory(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
this.serviceProvider = serviceProvider
}
public IFooService CreateService(string heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter)
{
return this.serviceProvider.GetRequiredInstance<IFooService>();
}
}
...
services
.AddTransient<IFooService, MyFooService>()
.AddTransient<IFooServiceFactory, FooServiceFactory>()
.Decorate<IFooService, LoggingFooService>();
But since MyFooService takes a primitive value as an argument, we cannot rely on GetRequiredService<T> to obtain the instance, as it will fail to find "a registration for string" when building the concrete class.
Similarly, changing the factory to rely on ActivatorUtilities's .CreateInstance or .CreateFactory methods will end up creating the objects while completely ignoring the container registrations, thus leaving us without any decorator.
I know I have at least 2 options to decorate the objects manually, namely:
Using the factory itself to manually create the decorator:
public IFooService CreateService(string heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter)
{
return new LoggingService(
new MyFooService(heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter));
}
Using a factory decorator to inject a decorator after the instance is created:
abstract class FooServiceFactoryDecorator : IFooServiceFactory
{
private readonly IFooServiceFactory fooServiceFactory;
protected FooServiceFactory(IFooServiceFactory fooServiceFactory)
{
this.fooServiceFactory = fooServiceFactory;
}
public virtual IFooService CreateService(string heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter)
{
return this.fooServiceFactory.CreateService(heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter);
}
}
class LoggingFooServiceFactory : FooServiceFactoryDecorator
{
private readonly IFooServiceFactory fooServiceFactory;
public FooServiceFactory(IFooServiceFactory fooServiceFactory)
{
this.fooServiceFactory = fooServiceFactory;
}
public override IFooService CreateService(string heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter)
{
return new LoggingFooService(
this.fooServiceFactory.CreateService(heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter));
}
}
...
services
.AddTransient<IFooServiceFactory, FooServiceFactory>()
.Decorate<IFooServiceFactory, LoggingFooServiceFactory>()
Neither of these allows me to directly use .Decorate on top of the service interface. The first option works but is heavily coupled (meaning I'd have to keep changing it if I want to add other decorators into the mix), while the second version is less coupled, but still forces me to writing one factory decorator per service decorator and thus leads into a much more complex solution.
Another pain point is dependencies on the decorators themselves (for example, ILogger<T> on the LoggingFooService), which I could potentially solve by leveraging ActivatorUtilities to create the decorators instead of newing them up manually.
I could also potentially generalize the "factory decorator" so that the decoration function is parameterized and thus the class can be reused, but it is still very convoluted and hard to maintain, while also not providing as good a syntax for consumers to add new decorators.
class DecoratedFooServiceFactory<TDecorator> : FooServiceFactoryDecorator
where TDecorator : IFooService
{
private readonly IFooServiceFactory fooServiceFactory;
private readonly IServiceProvider serviceProvider;
public FooServiceFactory(
IFooServiceFactory fooServiceFactory,
IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
this.fooServiceFactory = fooServiceFactory;
this.serviceProvider = serviceProvider;
}
public override IFooService CreateService(string heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter)
{
return ActivatorUtilities.CreateInstance<TDecorator>(
this.serviceProvider,
this.fooServiceFactory.CreateService(heyItsNowAMethodLevelPeskyParameter));
}
}
...
services
.AddTransient<IFooServiceFactory, FooServiceFactory>()
.Decorate<IFooServiceFactory, DecoratedFooServiceFactory<LoggingFooService>>()
And finally, if I ever want to move away from using a factory and want to change to using the service directly, this will cause a significant setup change where I'd then have to configure all the decorators again in the container directly instead of just removing the factory registration as one normally would do.
How can I use a factory like this, while still keeping the capability of configuring decorators at the container level using the simple Scrutor syntax?
Ok, a couple of disclaimers first:
I agree with Steven here in that this looks like an anti-pattern and you will probably be better off redesigning your code to not require run-time values on service construction.
I additionally want to caution against using scrutor-like Decorate. While much less confident in this than in the first point, I believe hiding logging in decorators is much less convenient in the long run than it seems at first. Or at least that's what I saw after about a year of trying them out.
That said, let's see what can be done.
First, let's put some constraints on where the value is coming from. Specifically, let's say we can have a service providing that value, that looks like this:
public interface IValueProvider
{
string Get();
}
This actually allows us to have quite a bit of range. Implementation of that interface can:
Get value from external API - once or periodically in the background. It can even call it every time Get is called, but this is a very bad idea, as it will make construction asynchronous.
Get value that is stored in memory and allow some other service to update it. Say, expose a 'configuration' endpoint where a user can set a new value every once in a while.
Calculate the value based on some algorithm of your choice.
Once you have this service, you can register it like this:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddSingleton<IValueProvider, AwesomeValueProvider>();
services.AddSingleton<IFooServiceFactory, FooServiceFactory>();
services.AddTransient<IFooService>(sp =>
{
var factory = sp.GetRequiredService<IFooServiceFactory>();
var valueProvider = sp.GetRequiredService<IValueProvider>();
return factory.Create(valueProvider.Get());
});
}
Hope this helps
I have following code which uses functional style to define two functions for kafka topics
#Bean
public Function<KStream<String, CloudEvent<ClassA>>, KStream<String, CloudEvent<ClassB>>> method1() {
....... //lambda
}
#Bean
public Function<KStream<String, CloudEvent<ClassB>>, KStream<String, CloudEvent<ClassC>>> method2() {
...... //lambda
}
For these two functions I define serdes so
#Bean
public Serde<CloudEventMessage<ClassA>> classASerde(ObjectMapper mapper, Validator validator) {
return StreamsSerdes.classASerde(mapper,validator);
}
#Bean
public Serde<CloudEventMessage<ClassB>> classBSerde(ObjectMapper mapper, Validator validator) {
return StreamsSerdes.classBSerde(mapper,validator);
}
This construction doesn't work as at runtime spring tries to deserialize CloudEvent<ClassB> with Serde of CloutEvent<ClassA>. Is there someway to give hint to use the correct serde for method1 and method2 ?
Secondly I could bypass the above issues by mentioning Serdes in application.properties
spring.application.cloud.stream.kafka.streams.bindings.method1-in-0.consumer.valueSerde=package.serde.StreamsSerdes$ClassASerde
spring.application.cloud.stream.kafka.streams.bindings.method2-in-0.consumer.valueSerde=package.serde.StreamsSerdes$ClassBSerde
However now I get other issues as these Serde classes don't have default constructor. I do need ObjectMapper, Validator from Spring to inject beans (#Service) to perfrom converstions/validations during deserialization.
Has anyone come across similar issues or perhaps have ideas how to resolve them ?
Thanks
I think it is a gap that the nested generics are not working right now in the binder. Do you mind creating an issue in the repository and linking this thread?
As to the second issue that you are running into when providing properties in application.properties, you can try using a workaround. The Serde interface has a configure method that takes a map.
default void configure(Map<String, ?> configs, boolean isKey) {
// intentionally left blank
}
Override this method in your Serde implementation and set those bean objects under some keys.
ObjectMapper mapper;
Validator validator;
#Override
public void configure(Map<String, ?> configs, boolean isKey) {
this.mapper = (ObjectMapper) configs.get("mapper.key");
this.validator = (Validator) configs.get("validator.key");
}
You need to remove accessing them from the constructor and use those fields directly for deserialization and serialization.
Then you provide this bean in your application to populate the map:
#Bean
public StreamsBuilderFactoryBeanCustomizer streamsBuilderFactoryBeanCustomizer(ObjectMapper mapper, Validator validator) {
return factoryBean -> {
factoryBean.getStreamsConfiguration().put("mappeer.key", mapper);
factoryBean.getStreamsConfiguration().put("validator.key", validator);
};
}
I haven't tried this code in an application, but it is something that you can try and see if it works with your code.
I have a Spring MVC survey application where the Controller method called by each form POST is virtually identical:
#PostMapping("/1")
public String processGroupOne (
Model model,
#ModelAttribute("pageNum") int pageNum,
#ModelAttribute(GlobalControllerAdvice.SESSION_ATTRIBUTE_NAME) #Validated(SurveyGroupOne.class) SurveyCommand surveyCommand,
BindingResult result) {
if (result.hasErrors()) {
LOG.debug(result.getAllErrors().toString());
model.addAttribute("pageNum", pageNum);
return "survey/page".concat(Integer.toString(pageNum));
}
pageNum++;
model.addAttribute("pageNum", pageNum);
return "redirect:/survey/".concat(Integer.toString(pageNum));
}
The only difference is what part of the SurveyCommand object is validated at each stop along the way. This is designated by the marker interface passed to the #Validated() annotation. The marker interfaces (SurveyGroupOne, SurveyGroupTwo, etc) are just that, markers:
public interface SurveyGroupOne {}
public interface SurveyGroupTwo {}
...
and they are applied to properties of objects in the SurveyCommand object:
public class Person {
#NotBlank(groups = {
SurveyGroupTwo.class,
SurveyGroupThree.class})
private String firstName;
#NotBlank(groups = {
SurveyGroupTwo.class,
SurveyGroupThree.class})
private String lastName;
...
}
My question: how can I make the method generic and still use the marker interface specific to the page being processed? Something like this:
#PostMapping("/{pageNum}")
public String processGroupOne (
Model model,
#PathVariable("pageNum") int pageNum,
#ModelAttribute(GlobalControllerAdvice.SESSION_ATTRIBUTE_NAME)
#Validated(__what goes here??__) SurveyCommand surveyCommand,
BindingResult result) {
if (result.hasErrors()) {
LOG.debug(result.getAllErrors().toString());
model.addAttribute("pageNum", pageNum);
return "survey/page".concat(Integer.toString(pageNum));
}
pageNum++;
model.addAttribute("pageNum", pageNum);
return "redirect:/survey/".concat(Integer.toString(pageNum));
}
How can I pass the proper marker interface to #Validated based solely on the pageNum #PathVariable (or any other parameter)?
Because #Validated is an annotation, it requires its arguments to be available during compilation and hence static. You can still use it but in this case you will have N methods, where N is a number of steps. To distinguish one step from another you can use params argument of #PostMapping annotation.
There is also another way where you need to inject Validator to the controller and invoke it directly with an appropriate group that you need.
I'd like to display a warning message on specific pages 5 minutes prior to a system shutdown. Rather than add it manually to each these pages I created a #ControllerAdvice class with a #ModelAttribute method that adds the message to the Model parameter, but from what I understand reading the documentation and SO and some initial testing this model attribute will be added to every method with a #RequestMapping.
I realize I could refactor my code so that the targeted methods are all in one controller and limit the #ControllerAdvice to that one controller, but I would end up with a collection of otherwise non-related methods in that controller which muddies up the overall structure of my controllers.
So, is there a way to indicate which specific methods in multiple controllers the #ModelAttribute is applied to? Would a custom annotation be a solution (not sure how that would work)? I'd like to do this via annotations if possible.
Edit:
The #ControllerAdvice code is pretty basic:
#ControllerAdvice
public class GlobalModelController {
private final Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(getClass());
#Autowired
private MaintenanceInterceptor maintInterceptor;
#ModelAttribute()
public void globalAttributes(Model model, Locale locale) {
if (maintInterceptor.isMaintenanceWindowSet() && !maintInterceptor.isMaintenanceInEffect()) {
String msg = maintInterceptor.getImminentMaint(locale);
model.addAttribute("warningMaint", msg);
logger.debug("maint msg= " + msg);
}
}
}
A controller advice can be limited to certain controllers (not methods) by using one of the values of the #ControllerAdvice annotation, e.g.
#ControllerAdvice(assignableTypes = {MyController1.class, MyController2.class})
If you need to do it on a method level I suggest to take a look at Interceptors.
Thanks to #zeroflagL for pointing me to the interceptor solution. I ditched the #ControllerAdvice approach and ended up with this:
Custom annotation:
#Target({ElementType.METHOD, ElementType.TYPE})
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Qualifier
public #interface MaintAware {
String name() default "MaintAware";
}
Interceptor:
#Override
public void postHandle(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response, Object handler, ModelAndView modelAndView) throws Exception {
HandlerMethod handlerMethod = (HandlerMethod)handler;
Method method = handlerMethod.getMethod();
MaintAware maintAware = method.getAnnotation(MaintAware.class);
if (maintAware != null) {
Locale locale = request.getLocale();
if (isMaintenanceWindowSet() && !isMaintenanceInEffect()) {
String msg = getImminentMaint(locale);
if (!msg.isEmpty())
modelAndView.addObject("warningMaint", msg);
}
}
super.postHandle(request, response, handler, modelAndView);
}
Now I can annotate the specific methods that require the maintenance notification. Easy peasy. :)
I bumped into an additional question that I needed in regards to this: Using an IEnumerable<T> as a delegate return type
From the above solution, the following was suggested:
class Example
{
//the delegate declaration
public delegate IEnumerable<T> GetGridDataSource<T>();
//the generic method used to call the method
public void someMethod<T>(GetGridDataSource<T> method)
{
method();
}
//a method to pass to "someMethod<T>"
private IEnumerable<string> methodBeingCalled()
{
return Enumerable.Empty<string>();
}
//our main program look
static void Main(string[] args)
{
//create a new instance of our example
var myObject = new Example();
//invoke the method passing the method
myObject.someMethod<string>(myObject.methodBeingCalled);
}
}
Notice that in someMethod, the delegate "method()" is called. Is there anyway to set a class-level delegate that is called later on?
I.e:
class Example {
//the delegate declaration
public delegate IEnumerable<T> GetGridDataSource<T>();
//this fails because T is never provided
private GetGridDataSource<T> getDS;
//the generic method used to call the method
public void someMethod<T>(GetGridDataSource<T> method)
{
getDS = method;
}
public void anotherMethod() {
getDS();
}
}
Depending on what you are trying to achieve and where you have flexibility in your design, there are a number of options. I've tried to cover the ones that I feel most probably relate to what you want to do.
Multiple values of T in a single instance of a non-generic class
This is basically what you seem to want. However, because of the generic nature of the method call, you'll need a class level variable that can support any possible value of T, and you will need to know T when you store a value for the delegate.
Therefore, you can either use a Dictionary<Type, object> or you could use a nested type that encapsulates the class-level variable and the method, and then use a List<WrapperType<T>> instead.
You would then need to look up the appropriate delegate based on the required type.
class Example {
//the delegate declaration
public delegate IEnumerable<T> GetGridDataSource<T>();
//this works because T is provided
private Dictionary<Type, object> getDSMap;
//the generic method used to call the method
public void someMethod<T>(GetGridDataSource<T> method)
{
getDSMap[typeof(T)] = method;
}
//note, this call needs to know the type of T
public void anotherMethod<T>() {
object getDSObj = null;
if (this.getDSMap.TryGetValue(typeof(T), out getDSObj))
{
GetGridDataSource<T> getDS = getDSObj as GetGridDataSource<T>;
if (getDS != null)
getDS();
}
}
Single value of T in a single instance of a non-generic class
In this case, you could store the delegate instance in a non-typed delegate and then cast it to the appropriate type when you need it and you know the value of T. Of course, you'd need to know T when you first create the delegate, which negates the need for a generic method or delegate in the first place.
Multiple values of T in multiple instances of a generic class
Here you can make your parent class generic and supply T up front. This then makes the example you have work correctly as the type of T is known from the start.
class Example<T> {
//the delegate declaration
public delegate IEnumerable<T> GetGridDataSource<T>();
//this works because T is provided
private GetGridDataSource<T> getDS;
//the generic method used to call the method
public void someMethod<T>(GetGridDataSource<T> method)
{
getDS = method;
}
public void anotherMethod() {
if (getDS != null)
getDS();
}
}
You either need to make the type generic as well, or use plain Delegate and cast back to the right type when you need to invoke it. You can't just use T outside a generic context - the compiler will think you're trying to refer to a normal type called T.
To put it another way - if you're going to try to use the same type T in two different places, you're going to need to know what T is somewhere in the type... and if the type isn't generic, where is that information going to live?