DDevelopment & Design

SortedSet + Joda DateTime == danger

  • bympr
  • February 16, 2013
  • 2 minute read
It’s been quite a long time since I wrote something on this blog… Two things occurred that made me do this. Firstly, I’m going to talk at Java Developer’s Conference in Cairo and at Booster conference in Bergen next month, so I want to have some co…

It’s been quite a long time since I wrote something on this blog… Two things occurred that made me do this.
Firstly, I’m going to talk at Java Developer’s Conference in Cairo and at Booster conference in Bergen next month, so I want to have some content when I put a link at my slides ;)
Secondly, last week I encountered really weird situation. In fact it was endless loop.
Yep.
In was in rather critical place of our app and it was on semi-production environment so it was quite embarassing. What’s more, the code was working before, it was untouched for about half a year, and it had pretty good test coverage. It looked more or less like this (I’ve left some stuff out, so now it looks too complex for it’s task):

def findDates(dates:SortedSet[DateTime],a:List[DateTime])=
  if (dates.isEmpty || dates.head.toMilis < date) {
    (dates, a)
  } else {
    findDates(dates - dates.head, a+dates.head)
  }

Just simple tail recursion, how can it loop endlessly? It turns out it can. Actually, for some specific data dates – dates.head == dates.
Why? The reason is DateTime is not consistent with equals. If you look into Comparable definition, it says:

It is strongly recommended (though not required) that natural orderings be consistent with equals. This is so because sorted sets (and sorted maps) without explicit comparators behave “strangely” when they are used with elements (or keys) whose natural ordering is inconsistent with equals. In particular, such a sorted set (or sorted map) violates the general contract for set (or map), which is defined in terms of the equals method.

What does this mean? That you should only use sorted collections for classes that satisfy following:if a.compareTo(b) == 0 then a.equals(b) == true And in joda’s DateTime javadoc you can read:

Compares this object with the specified object for ascending millisecond instant order. This ordering is inconsistent with equals, as it ignores the Chronology.

And it turns out that this was our case – in our data there were dates that were equal with respect to miliseconds, but in different timezones. What’s more, not every pair of such dates can lead to disaster. They have to cause some mess in underlying black-red tree… The solution was to introduce some wrapper (we used it anyway actually) that defined comparison consistent with equality…

— Previous article

<!--:pl-->BYOP w Warszawie, 11.02<!--:--><!--:en-->BYOP @ Warsaw, Feb 12th<!--:-->

Next article —

Grails session timeout without XML

You May Also Like
DDevelopment & Design

OVal – validate your models quickly and effortlessly!

Some time ago one of the projects at work required me to validate some Java POJOs. Theses were my model classes and I've been creating them from incoming WebService requests. One would say that XSD would be sufficient for the task, for parts of this va...Some time ago one of the projects at work required me to validate some Java POJOs. Theses were my model classes and I've been creating them from incoming WebService requests. One would say that XSD would be sufficient for the task, for parts of this va...
DDevelopment & Design

JBoss Envers and Spring transaction managers

I've stumbled upon a bug with my configuration for JBoss Envers today, despite having integration tests all over the application. I have to admit, it casted a dark shadow of doubt about the value of all the tests for a moment. I've been practicing TDD since 2005, and frankly speaking, I should have been smarter than that.

My fault was simple. I've started using Envers the right way, with exploratory tests and a prototype. Then I've deleted the prototype and created some integration tests using in-memory H2 that looked more or less like this example:

@Test
public void savingAndUpdatingPersonShouldCreateTwoHistoricalVersions() {
    //given
    Person person = createAndSavePerson();
    String oldFirstName = person.getFirstName();
    String newFirstName = oldFirstName + "NEW";

    //when
    updatePersonWithNewName(person, newFirstName);

    //then
    verifyTwoHistoricalVersionsWereSaved(oldFirstName, newFirstName);
}

private Person createAndSavePerson() {
    Transaction transaction = session.beginTransaction();
    Person person = PersonFactory.createPerson();
    session.save(person);
    transaction.commit();
    return person;
}    

private void updatePersonWithNewName(Person person, String newName) {
    Transaction transaction = session.beginTransaction();
    person.setFirstName(newName);
    session.update(person);
    transaction.commit();
}

private void verifyTwoHistoricalVersionsWereSaved(String oldFirstName, String newFirstName) {
    List<Object[]> personRevisions = getPersonRevisions();
    assertEquals(2, personRevisions.size());
    assertEquals(oldFirstName, ((Person)personRevisions.get(0)[0]).getFirstName());
    assertEquals(newFirstName, ((Person)personRevisions.get(1)[0]).getFirstName());
}

private List<Object[]> getPersonRevisions() {
    Transaction transaction = session.beginTransaction();
    AuditReader auditReader = AuditReaderFactory.get(session);
    List<Object[]> personRevisions = auditReader.createQuery()
            .forRevisionsOfEntity(Person.class, false, true)
            .getResultList();
    transaction.commit();
    return personRevisions;
}

Because Envers inserts audit data when the transaction is commited (in a new temporary session), I thought I have to create and commit the transaction manually. And that is true to some point.

My fault was that I didn't have an end-to-end integration/acceptance test, that would call to entry point of the application (in this case a service which is called by GWT via RPC), because then I'd notice, that the Spring @Transactional annotation, and calling transaction.commit() are two, very different things.

Spring @Transactional annotation will use a transaction manager configured for the application. Envers on the other hand is used by subscribing a listener to hibernate's SessionFactory like this:

<bean id="sessionFactory" class="org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.annotation.AnnotationSessionFactoryBean" >        
...
 <property name="eventListeners">
     <map key-type="java.lang.String" value-type="org.hibernate.event.EventListeners">
         <entry key="post-insert" value-ref="auditEventListener"/>
         <entry key="post-update" value-ref="auditEventListener"/>
         <entry key="post-delete" value-ref="auditEventListener"/>
         <entry key="pre-collection-update" value-ref="auditEventListener"/>
         <entry key="pre-collection-remove" value-ref="auditEventListener"/>
         <entry key="post-collection-recreate" value-ref="auditEventListener"/>
     </map>
 </property>
</bean>

<bean id="auditEventListener" class="org.hibernate.envers.event.AuditEventListener" />

Envers creates and collects something called AuditWorkUnits whenever you update/delete/insert audited entities, but audit tables are not populated until something calls AuditProcess.beforeCompletion, which makes sense. If you are using org.hibernate.transaction.JDBCTransaction manually, this is called on commit() when notifying all subscribed javax.transaction.Synchronization objects (and enver's AuditProcess is one of them).

The problem was, that I used a wrong transaction manager.

<bean id="transactionManager" class="org.springframework.jdbc.datasource.DataSourceTransactionManager" >
    <property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/>
</bean>

This transaction manager doesn't know anything about hibernate and doesn't use org.hibernate.transaction.JDBCTransaction. While Synchronization is an interface from javax.transaction package, DataSourceTransactionManager doesn't use it (maybe because of simplicity, I didn't dig deep enough in org.springframework.jdbc.datasource), and thus Envers works fine except not pushing the data to the database.

Which is the whole point of using Envers.

Use right tools for the task, they say. The whole problem is solved by using a transaction manager that is well aware of hibernate underneath.

<bean id="transactionManager" class="org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateTransactionManager" >
    <property name="sessionFactory" ref="sessionFactory"/>
</bean>

Lesson learned: always make sure your acceptance tests are testing the right thing. If there is a doubt about the value of your tests, you just don't have enough of them,