Hibernate annotations + Spring transactions in OSGI

On our new project we decided to develop backend as services deployed on Servicemix 4.2. To make it easier for developers more familiar with ‘traditional’ web applications based on spring+hibernate stack it should (at least partially) resemble such application. Therefore, we want to have following bundles:

  • model –  containing hibernate classes
  • dao – implemented using hibernate template
  • service – interfaces for bundles implementing webservices, also controlling transactions, validation and similar stuff

So far, so good. Additional requirements are:

  • hibernate is configured using annotations
  • we use declarative transaction management with spring @Transactional annotation

Now, the question is – how to achieve it in OSGI environment? There are some tutorials on the web, but I haven’t found anything about this particular configuration, so I want to share our solution – as it wasn’t as straightforward as one might expect.

Hibernate bundle

The very first problem was the structure of hibernate jars themselves. It turned out that simple

wrap:mvn:org.hibernate:hibernate:3.3.1.GA

is not enough when one wants to use annotations. The problem is that both hibernate-core, and hibernate-annotations are using same package, namely org.hibernate.cfg. This is pretty anti-OSGI design, as OSGI bundle can use package exported by exactly one bundle.

The solution is of course pretty simple – we have to create our own bundle, which embeds both hibernate jars. This can be achieved with following maven-bundle-plugin configuration:

          

    *;uses:="org.hibernate";version=3.3.1.GA
    !*
    *;scope=compile|runtime;type=!pom;inline=true

Of course, you have to add hibernate dependencies to pom.

Session factory and transaction management

Servicemix has its own JTA TransactionManager, and at first I wanted to use it for managing our hibernate transactions. Unfortunatelly it turned to be somewhat tricky, so I decided to use simple solution, i.e. org.springframework.orm.hibernate.HibernateTransactionManager. It is declared in our dao bundle and exported as OSGI service:

	

    org.springframework.transaction.PlatformTransactionManager

Then, in service bundle we import it, and configure declarative transactions:


So far, it doesn’t look much more complicated than in traditional, monolithic war application. But there is one more caveat:

org.hibernate.jdbc.ConnectionWrapper is not visible from class loader

At first I thought it’s a matter of some misconfigured import/export declarations in some of our bundles. However, after some googling it turned out that it’s Hibernate’s bug

It is caused by using Thread context classloader when obtaining connection. It looks that the bug itself is already fixed, but we didn’t want to change to Hibernate 3.5 just because of that.

It turns out that there is quire simple workaround – you just need to make Spring aspect that will set context classloader to proper one (i.e. bundle class loader) before opening hibernate session, and you’re done. But again, using Servicemix makes it slightly harded, as it turns out that using @AspectJ style poses some difficulties (see e.g. this thread).

But it turns out that there is pretty simple solution – use old, Spring 1.x-style aspects :). This requires a bit more boilerplate xml, but at least we got it working pretty quickly.

The aspect class, setting proper classloader:

public class AspectFix implements MethodInterceptor {

    public Object invoke(MethodInvocation invocation) throws Throwable {
        ClassLoader contextClassLoader = Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader();
        Thread.currentThread().setContextClassLoader(getClass().getClassLoader());
        try {
            return invocation.proceed();
        }
            finally{ Thread.currentThread().setContextClassLoader(contextClassLoader);
        }
    }

The xml config:


      .*

    *Service

      fix

Final remark – now the service bundle has to import org.hibernate.jdbc to make it all work – as its classloader is used to initialize connection now.

To sum up: this is definitely not the most elegant solution one can imagine- but it’s working.

You May Also Like

Thought static method can’t be easy to mock, stub nor track? Wrong!

No matter why, no matter is it a good idea. Sometimes one just wants to check or it's necessary to be done. Mock a static method, woot? Impossibru!

In pure Java world it is still a struggle. But Groovy allows you to do that really simple. Well, not groovy alone, but with a great support of Spock.

Lets move on straight to the example. To catch some context we have an abstract for the example needs. A marketing project with a set of offers. One to many.

import spock.lang.Specification

class OfferFacadeSpec extends Specification {

    OfferFacade facade = new OfferFacade()

    def setup() {
        GroovyMock(Project, global: true)
    }

    def 'delegates an add offer call to the domain with proper params'() {
        given:
            Map params = [projId: projectId, name: offerName]

        when:
            Offer returnedOffer = facade.add(params)

        then:
            1 * Project.addOffer(projectId, _) >> { projId, offer -> offer }
            returnedOffer.name == params.name

        where:
            projectId | offerName
            1         | 'an Offer'
            15        | 'whasup!?'
            123       | 'doskonała oferta - kup teraz!'
    }
}
So we test a facade responsible for handling "add offer to the project" call triggered  somewhere in a GUI.
We want to ensure that static method Project.addOffer(long, Offer) will receive correct params when java.util.Map with user form input comes to the facade.add(params).
This is unit test, so how Project.addOffer() works is out of scope. Thus we want to stub it.

The most important is a GroovyMock(Project, global: true) statement.
What it does is modifing Project class to behave like a Spock's mock. 
GroovyMock() itself is a method inherited from SpecificationThe global flag is necessary to enable mocking static methods.
However when one comes to the need of mocking static method, author of Spock Framework advice to consider redesigning of implementation. It's not a bad advice, I must say.

Another important thing are assertions at then: block. First one checks an interaction, if the Project.addOffer() method was called exactly once, with a 1st argument equal to the projectId and some other param (we don't have an object instance yet to assert anything about it).
Right shit operator leads us to the stub which replaces original method implementation by such statement.
As a good stub it does nothing. The original method definition has return type Offer. The stub needs to do the same. So an offer passed as the 2nd argument is just returned.
Thanks to this we can assert about name property if it's equal with the value from params. If no return was designed the name could be checked inside the stub Closure, prefixed with an assert keyword.

Worth of  mentioning is that if you want to track interactions of original static method implementation without replacing it, then you should try using GroovySpy instead of GroovyMock.

Unfortunately static methods declared at Java object can't be treated in such ways. Though regular mocks and whole goodness of Spock can be used to test pure Java code, which is awesome anyway :)No matter why, no matter is it a good idea. Sometimes one just wants to check or it's necessary to be done. Mock a static method, woot? Impossibru!

In pure Java world it is still a struggle. But Groovy allows you to do that really simple. Well, not groovy alone, but with a great support of Spock.

Lets move on straight to the example. To catch some context we have an abstract for the example needs. A marketing project with a set of offers. One to many.

import spock.lang.Specification

class OfferFacadeSpec extends Specification {

    OfferFacade facade = new OfferFacade()

    def setup() {
        GroovyMock(Project, global: true)
    }

    def 'delegates an add offer call to the domain with proper params'() {
        given:
            Map params = [projId: projectId, name: offerName]

        when:
            Offer returnedOffer = facade.add(params)

        then:
            1 * Project.addOffer(projectId, _) >> { projId, offer -> offer }
            returnedOffer.name == params.name

        where:
            projectId | offerName
            1         | 'an Offer'
            15        | 'whasup!?'
            123       | 'doskonała oferta - kup teraz!'
    }
}
So we test a facade responsible for handling "add offer to the project" call triggered  somewhere in a GUI.
We want to ensure that static method Project.addOffer(long, Offer) will receive correct params when java.util.Map with user form input comes to the facade.add(params).
This is unit test, so how Project.addOffer() works is out of scope. Thus we want to stub it.

The most important is a GroovyMock(Project, global: true) statement.
What it does is modifing Project class to behave like a Spock's mock. 
GroovyMock() itself is a method inherited from SpecificationThe global flag is necessary to enable mocking static methods.
However when one comes to the need of mocking static method, author of Spock Framework advice to consider redesigning of implementation. It's not a bad advice, I must say.

Another important thing are assertions at then: block. First one checks an interaction, if the Project.addOffer() method was called exactly once, with a 1st argument equal to the projectId and some other param (we don't have an object instance yet to assert anything about it).
Right shit operator leads us to the stub which replaces original method implementation by such statement.
As a good stub it does nothing. The original method definition has return type Offer. The stub needs to do the same. So an offer passed as the 2nd argument is just returned.
Thanks to this we can assert about name property if it's equal with the value from params. If no return was designed the name could be checked inside the stub Closure, prefixed with an assert keyword.

Worth of  mentioning is that if you want to track interactions of original static method implementation without replacing it, then you should try using GroovySpy instead of GroovyMock.

Unfortunately static methods declared at Java object can't be treated in such ways. Though regular mocks and whole goodness of Spock can be used to test pure Java code, which is awesome anyway :)

Grails render as JSON catch

One of a reasons your controller doesn't render a proper response in JSON format might be wrong package name that you use. It is easy to overlook. Import are on top of a file, you look at your code and everything seems to be fine. Except response is still not in JSON format.

Consider this simple controller:

class RestJsonCatchController {
def grailsJson() {
render([first: 'foo', second: 5] as grails.converters.JSON)
}

def netSfJson() {
render([first: 'foo', second: 5] as net.sf.json.JSON)
}
}

And now, with finger crossed... We have a winner!

$ curl localhost:8080/example/restJsonCatch/grailsJson
{"first":"foo","second":5}
$ curl localhost:8080/example/restJsonCatch/netSfJson
{first=foo, second=5}

As you can see only grails.converters.JSON converts your response to JSON format. There is no such converter for net.sf.json.JSON, so Grails has no converter to apply and it renders Map normally.

Conclusion: always carefully look at your imports if you're working with JSON in Grails!

Edit: Burt suggested that this is a bug. I've submitted JIRA issue here: GRAILS-9622 render as class that is not a codec should throw exception