I have a class A, a cache A_CACHE and a proxy object AProxy extends A. My goal is to serialize AProxy objects as if they are A objects (automatically substitute type) and put them into A_CACHE.
Is there any way in Apache Ignite to substitute type of an object that I am trying to put into cache (serialize using BinarySerializer)?
What I have tried so far.
I have implemented and registered the same BinarySerializer for both types. I have also tried to play with BinaryNameMapper class to return the same class name for both classes, but without success. The only option that comes to my mind now is to use BinaryObjectBuilder. Is it really the only option for me?
After a small research the solution was found.
AProxy should implement writeReplace method of Serializable interface. Return proxied instance from this method. If proxied class is Serializable or Externalizable and one wants to apply custom serialization, than Binarylizable interface should be implemented by proxied class (custom binary serializers are not applied when using the hack above, but instead OptimizedMarshaller is being used).
Related
I have the following code working in a SpringBoot application, and it does what's I'm expecting.
TypePool typePool = TypePool.Default.ofClassPath();
ByteBuddyAgent.install();
new ByteBuddy()
.rebase(typePool.describe("com.foo.Bar").resolve(), ClassFileLocator.ForClassLoader.ofClassPath())
.implement(typePool.describe("com.foo.SomeInterface").resolve())
.make()
.load(ClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader());
Its makes is so that the class com.foo.Bar implements the interface com.foo.SomeInterface (which has a default implementation)
I would like to . use the above code by referring to the class as Bar.class, not using the string representation of the name. But if I do that I get the following exception.
java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: class redefinition failed: attempted to change superclass or interfaces
I believe due to the fact that it cause the class to be loaded, prior to the redefinition. I'm just now learning to use ByteBuddy.
I want to avoid some reflection at runtime, by adding the interface and an implementation using ByteBuddy. I've some other code that checks for this interface.
This is impossible, not because of Byte Buddy but no tool is allowed to do this on a regular VM. (There is the so-called dynamic code evolution VM which is capable of that).
If you want to avoid the problem, use redefine rather then rebase. Whenever you instrument a method, you do now however replace the original.
If this is not acceptable, have a look at the Advice class which you can use by the .visit-API to wrap logic around your original code without replacing it.
I have an API exposed via Spring Data Rest which, for the most part, is read-only but which allows for updating of some properties via PATCH requests.
Is there any (I'm supposing Jackson) configuration at a global level that would essentially make an entity read only unless specific properties were annotated in some way.
I am familiar with the#JsonProperty(access = Access.READ_ONLY) Jackson annotation however would like to avoid having to annotate all read-only properties.
For example, given the class below only the field explicitly annotated would be writable. All other fields would be readable by default:
public class Thing{
private String fieldOne;
#JsonProperty(access = Access.READ_WRITE)
private String fieldTwo;
private String fieldThree;
// a lot of other properties
}
Failing any global configuration, is there anything that can be applied at the class level?
I am not aware of any way to globally set all attributes in a class to read only. Since version 2.6+ of FaserXML you can use the following annotation to at least defined the set of properties you would ignore and only allow for serialization. The following annotation would be used at the class level:
#JsonIgnoreProperties(value={ "fieldOne", "fieldThree"}, allowGetters=true)
It is not exactly what you are looking for, but arguably makes coding a little easier.
I read this on a guideline
"When using Spring AOP always use interfaces so normal AOP proxying can be used (rather than CGLIB)"
What could than mean? I have very good idea on AOP and have implemented AOP myself before. But completely out of clue.
Simply said there are 2 way for proxying an object :
dynamic : you create a new object that implement the same interface than the target object and encapsulate this last in addition with the proxy logic
static : when you compile the target class you add the aspect logic directly into the compiled class (cglib way)
Dynamic proxy can only apply on object that implement an interface and will be used only if you reference the instance using the interface (which is advised here) whereas static proxy can apply on everything
Following the spring guideline will allow you to use any of the method (you can simply switch using spring configuation) instead of being coupled to cglib.
Note than static proxy allow proxy logic to be applied even when you call a proxied method from another method inside the same class whereas with dynamic proxy the call must come from outside.
I want to be able to define in my web.config the type of connexion my object will use to get data (variable) (from an xml or from a databases).
I though about using a Strategie Pattern, but I'm somewhat stuck by the need to write somewhere the name of the class, which I do not want.
Any suggestions?
Additionnal info
I have the interface IContext.
It's implemented in ContextXML and ContextDB.
I have the class Context which has a IContext member (called _context).
The Context class reads (through ContextConfiguration) app.config.
I want _context to be able to be a ContextXML or a ContextDB... or a ContextJSon or any other new class that would implements IContext.
Have you thought about creating a ContextManager class and employing "configuration by convention"?
What I would do, is add a member getName to your IContext interface - this just returns a nice human-readable string for each implementation - as simple as "ContextXML" for your ContextXML class.
When your ContextManager (probably a Singleton, BTW) starts up, it scans a known directory for IContext implementations, instantiating them by reflection (or some other mechanism, I'm not familiar with VB.Net but I'm sure there's a way), and placing them in a collection.
Now when you are building up Context objects, you can ask your ContextManager for a suitable IContext - either explicitly [e.g. getIContextByName("ContextDB")] or with a simpler method that just returns whatever has been configured by some other mechanism - i.e. a suite of methods something like this:
getPossibleIContextImplementationNames()
setCurrentIContextImplementation({name})
getCurrentIContext()
Just as an aside, are you stuck with that naming? Because having a Context object that uses an IContext seems a little unusual. If your IContext implementations are actually used to retrieve data from somewhere, why not call the interface IDAO or IDataAccessor?
So we have a java class with two ArrayLists of generics. It looks like
public class Blah
{
public ArrayList<ConcreteClass> a;
public ArrayList<BaseClass> b;
}
by using [ArrayElementType('ConcreteClass')] in the actionscript class, we are able to get all the "a"s converted fine. However with "b", since the actual class coming across the line is a heterogeneous mix of classes like BaseClassImplementation1, BaseClassImplementation2 etc, it gets typed as an object. Is there a way to convert it to the specific concrete class assuming that a strongly typed AS version of the java class exists on the client side
thanks for your help!
Regis
To ensure that all of your DTO classes are marshalled across AS and Java, you need to define each remote class as a "remote class" in AS by using the "RemoteClass" attribute pointing to the java class definition like this [RemoteClass(alias="com.myco.class")].
BlazeDS will perform introspection on the class as it is being serialized/de-serialized and convert it appropriately (see doc below). It doesn't matter how the classes are packed or nested in an array, as long as it can be introspected it should work.
If you need special serialization for a class you can create your own serialization proxys (called beanproxy) by extending "AbastractProxy" and loading them into blazeds using the PropertyProxyRegistry register method on startup.
You will find most of this in the Blaze developers guide http://livedocs.adobe.com/blazeds/1/blazeds_devguide/.
Creating your own beanproxy class look here: //livedocs.adobe.com/blazeds/1/javadoc/flex/messaging/io/BeanProxy.html