java.lang.NullPointerException: null on AutoWiring a bean in StandAlone App - javabeans

When trying to use #AutoWire feature with one of StandAlone Application unable to do so instead getting Null Pointer Exception. Please highlight my mistakes if any. Your help is appreciated.
Spring Ver 5.1.5.RELEASE and we're not using any xml config file to tell spring there are annotated classes to look into instead using #ComponentScan or #EnableAutoConfiguration at the top of AppConfig and boost strap the Context from main() class as a first line. But Autowiring works perfectly with internal bean/java classes of jdk(Environment) but not with custom POJO classes. If we're trying to get through getBean method then it works. But I'm trying to avoid creating context everywhere and using getBean() Please Refer below and help me only with your valuable guidelines.
public class ContextMaster {
private static AnnotationConfigApplicationContext appContext;
public static AnnotationConfigApplicationContext getApplicationContext() {
if (appContext == null) {
appContext = new AnnotationConfigApplicationContext(ContextConfig.class);
//appContext = new AnnotationConfigApplicationContext("com.xx.xx.xxx","xx.xxx.xxxx.xxx.datamanager");
logger.debug("Context Invoked !!");
}
return appContext;
}
}
#Configuration
#EnableAutoConfiguration
#PropertySource("classpath:db.properties")
#EnableTransactionManagement
#ComponentScans(value = {
#ComponentScan(basePackages = "xxxxx.datamanager"),
#ComponentScan(basePackages = "com.xx.xx.xxx"),
#ComponentScan(basePackages = "com.xx.xx.xxx.utils")})
public class AppConfig {
#Autowired
private Environment env;
#Bean
public DataSource getDataSource() {
BasicDataSource dataSource = new BasicDataSource();
dataSource.setDriverClassName(env.getProperty("db.driver"));
dataSource.setUrl(env.getProperty("db.url"));
return dataSource;
}
#Bean
public LocalSessionFactoryBean getSessionFactory() {
LocalSessionFactoryBean factoryBean = new LocalSessionFactoryBean();
//LocalSessionFactoryBean sessionFactoryBean = new AnnotationSessionFactoryBean();
factoryBean.setDataSource(getDataSource());
Properties props=new Properties();
props.put("hibernate.show_sql", env.getProperty("hibernate.show_sql"));
props.put("hibernate.hbm2ddl.auto", env.getProperty("hibernate.hbm2ddl.auto"));
props.put("hibernate.cache.region.factory_class", env.getProperty("hibernate.cache.region.factory_class"));
factoryBean.setHibernateProperties(props);
factoryBean.setAnnotatedClasses(xx.class, xxxx.class, xxxx.class, xxx.class);
return factoryBean;
}
#Bean
public HibernateTransactionManager getTransactionManager() {
return transactionManager;
}
}
// Here is NPE thrown when tried with auto-configured bean
#Component
public class Good extends Good11 {
#Autowired
private RxxxDyyyyHelper rdh;
//RxxxDyyyyHelper rdh =
ContextHelper.getApplicationContext().getBean(RxxxDyyyyHelper .class);
rdh.setProperty(); // NPE here
rdh.getProperty(); // NPE
}
// Here we're trying to initiate the LosUtils class
public class LosUtils {
public static void main(String args[]) throws Exception {
AnnotationConfigApplicationContext applicationContext = `ContextHelper.getApplicationContext();`
}

It seems like you didn't put the full code here, because your Good class won't compile this way..

Related

How to use Jackson BeanDeserializerModifier?

I am trying to implement a custom deserializer.
Because I only want to add functionality to the default deserializer, I tried to store in my custom deserializer the default one: I would like to use the default to deserialize the json and then add other information.
I am trying to use BeanDeserializerModifier to register the custom deserializer.
SimpleModule module = new SimpleModule("ModelModule", Version.unknownVersion());
module.setDeserializerModifier(new BeanDeserializerModifier() {
#Override
public JsonDeserializer<?> modifyDeserializer(DeserializationConfig config, BeanDescription beanDesc, JsonDeserializer<?> deserializer) {
JsonDeserializer<?> configuredDeserializer = super.modifyDeserializer(config, beanDesc, deserializer);
if (Document.class.isAssignableFrom(beanDesc.getBeanClass())) {
logger.debug("Returning custom deserializer for documents");
configuredDeserializer = new DocumentDeserializer(configuredDeserializer, (Class<Document>)beanDesc.getBeanClass());
}
return configuredDeserializer;
}
});
As you can see, if the object to generate is a "Document", I am modifying the deserializer returning a custom deserializer. I am passing the default deserializer to the constructor so I can use it later.
When I try to deserialize, Jackson fails with the error:
No _valueDeserializer assigned(..)
I have investigated and it seems that the default deserializer does not have the correct deserializers for its properties: for all the properties, it is using the deserializer FailingDeserializer that, of course, fails and returns the error mentioned above. This deserializer is supposed to be substituted but it is not.
It seems that, after calling the method modifyDeserializer, Jackson completes the configuration.
The custom deserializer that I am using is:
#SuppressWarnings("serial")
public class DocumentDeserializer extends StdDeserializer<Document> {
private JsonDeserializer<?> defaultDeserializer;
private DocumentDeserializer(JsonDeserializer<?> defaultDeserializer, Class<? extends Document> clazz) {
super(clazz);
this.defaultDeserializer = defaultDeserializer;
}
#Override
public Document deserialize(JsonParser jp, DeserializationContext ctxt) throws IOException, JsonProcessingException {
Document documentDeserialized = (Document) defaultDeserializer.deserialize(jp, ctxt);
/* I want to modify the documentDeserialized before returning it */
return documentDeserialized;
}
}
UPDATE:
I solved the problem using a different Deserializer:
public class CustomDeserializerModifier extends BeanDeserializerModifier {
private static final Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(CustomDeserializerModifier.class);
public CustomDeserializerModifier (Factory factory) {
this.factory = factory;
}
#Override
public JsonDeserializer<?> modifyDeserializer(DeserializationConfig config, BeanDescription beanDesc, JsonDeserializer<?> deserializer) {
JsonDeserializer<?> configuredDeserializer;
if (CustomDeserializedNode.class.isAssignableFrom(beanDesc.getBeanClass())) {
Converter<Object, Object> conv = beanDesc.findDeserializationConverter();
JavaType delegateType = conv.getInputType(config.getTypeFactory());
configuredDeserializer = new CustomDeserializedNodeDeserializer(conv, delegateType, (JsonDeserializer<Document>) deserializer,
(Class<? extends CustomDocument<?>>)beanDesc.getBeanClass());
} else {
configuredDeserializer = super.modifyDeserializer(config, beanDesc, deserializer);
}
return configuredDeserializer;
}
#SuppressWarnings("serial")
public class CustomDeserializedNodeDeserializer extends StdDelegatingDeserializer<Object> {
private Class<? extends CustomDocument<?>> beanClass;
public CustomDeserializedNodeDeserializer(Converter<Object,Object> converter,
JavaType delegateType, JsonDeserializer<Document> delegateDeserializer, Class<? extends CustomDocument<?>> beanClass) {
super(converter, delegateType, delegateDeserializer);
this.beanClass = beanClass;
}
#Override
public CustomDeserializedNode deserialize(JsonParser jp, DeserializationContext ctxt)
throws IOException, JsonProcessingException {
CustomDeserializedNode node = (CustomDeserializedNode)factory.createCustomDocument(beanClass);
CustomDeserializedNode documentDeserialized = (Document) super.deserialize(jp, ctxt, node);
return documentDeserialized;
}
}
}
Probably extending StdDelegatingDeserializer does what #StaxMan is suggesting.
This should be added in a FAQ, but what you need to do is to implement 2 interfaces:
ResolvableDeserializer (method resolve(...))
ContextualDeserializer (method createContextual(...))
and delegate these calls to defaultDeserializer in case it implements one or both interfaces. These are required for deserializer initialization; especially ContextualDeserializer through which property annotations are made available to deserializers.
And ResolvableDeserializer is used by BeanDeserializer to get deserializers for properties it has, if any; this is where _valueDeserializer in question is likely to be fetched.

Resteasy and Google Guice: how to use multiple #ApplicationPath and resource with #Injection?

I created a project to test the dependency injection offered by Google Guice in my Jax-rs resources, using Resteasy.
My intentions are:
Use multiple #ApplicationPath for the versions of my API. In each class annotated with #ApplicationPath I load a set of classes for the specific version.
Each resource have a #Inject (from Google Guice) in his constructor to inject some services.
I created two classes annotated with #ApplicationPath: ApplicationV1RS and ApplicationV2RS. In both I added the same resources classes (UserResource and HelloResource), only for my test.
My Module is configured like this:
public class HelloModule implements Module
{
public void configure(final Binder binder)
{
binder.bind(IGreeterService.class).to(GreeterService.class);
binder.bind(IUserService.class).to(UserService.class);
}
}
When I call http://localhost:9095/v1/hello/world or http://localhost:9095/v2/hello/world, I receive the same error:
java.lang.RuntimeException: RESTEASY003190: Could not find constructor
for class: org.jboss.resteasy.examples.guice.hello.HelloResource
Well, as I expected, this not works. The Google Guice is not "smart" to instantiate the resource classes using the construtor for me.
But I can't find a way to work. To be really honest, I'm really confuse about how the Google Guice, Jetty and Resteasy play with each other in this scenario.
If I abandon the idea of use #ApplicationPath, my resources work with Google Guice configuring my HelloModule like this:
public class HelloModule implements Module
{
public void configure(final Binder binder)
{
binder.bind(HelloResource.class);
binder.bind(IGreeterService.class).to(GreeterService.class);
binder.bind(UserResource.class);
binder.bind(IUserService.class).to(UserService.class);
}
}
But in this case, I'm passing the control to register my resources (HelloResource and UserResource) to Guice. It's not flexible for me, I can't setup my multiple #ApplicationPath.
So, what I'm missing or not understanding?
I created a project with the problemetic code. Is very easy to setup and test: https://github.com/dherik/resteasy-guice-hello/tree/so-question/README.md
Thanks!
When you have getClasses method in your Application then it tries to create instance for all the registered resources using the default constructor which is missing in our Resources class. One way is to create a default constructor and Inject the dependencies through setter Injection.
And then instead of overriding getClasses in ApplicationV1RS and ApplicationV2RS you override getSingletons. Since Resources can be Singleton.
Below are the changes that I made to make it work the way you want.
ApplicationV1RS.java
#ApplicationPath("v1")
public class ApplicationV1RS extends Application {
private Set<Object> singletons = new HashSet<Object>();
public ApplicationV1RS(#Context ServletContext servletContext) {
}
#Override
public Set<Object> getSingletons() {
Injector injector = Guice.createInjector(new HelloModule());
HelloResource helloResource = injector.getInstance(HelloResource.class);
UserResource userResource = injector.getInstance(UserResource.class);
singletons.add(helloResource);
singletons.add(userResource);
return singletons;
}
}
ApplicationV2RS.java
#ApplicationPath("v2")
public class ApplicationV2RS extends Application {
private Set<Object> singletons = new HashSet<Object>();
public ApplicationV2RS(#Context ServletContext servletContext) {
}
#Override
public Set<Object> getSingletons() {
Injector injector = Guice.createInjector(new HelloModule());
HelloResource helloResource = injector.getInstance(HelloResource.class);
UserResource userResource = injector.getInstance(UserResource.class);
singletons.add(helloResource);
singletons.add(userResource);
return singletons;
}
}
HelloResource.java
#Path("hello")
public class HelloResource {
#Inject
private IGreeterService greeter;
public HelloResource() {
}
#GET
#Path("{name}")
public String hello(#PathParam("name") final String name) {
return greeter.greet(name);
}
}
UserResource.java
#Path("user")
public class UserResource {
#Inject
private IUserService userService;
public UserResource() {
}
#GET
#Path("{name}")
public String hello(#PathParam("name") final String name) {
return userService.getUser(name);
}
}
Add #Singleton to your Service Classes.
Hope it helps.
I have also pushed the code to forked repo. check it out

Replace #Value property within #Configuration during Spring Boot test

Scenario
I've got a Spring Boot application with a #Configuration annotated Spring configuration class which contains some #Value annotated fields. For testing I want to replace these field values with custom test values.
Unfortunately these test values cannot be overridden using a simple properties file, (String) constants or similar, instead I must use some custom written property resolving Java class (e.g. TargetProperties.getProperty("some.username")).
The problem I have is that when I add a custom PropertySource to the ConfigurableEnvironment within my test configuration, it's already too late because this PropertySource will be added after the e.g. RestTemplate has been created.
Question
How can I override #Value annotated fields within a #Configuration class with properties obtained programmatically via custom Java code before anything else gets initialized?
Code
Production Configuration Class
#Configuration
public class SomeConfiguration {
#Value("${some.username}")
private String someUsername;
#Value("${some.password}")
private String somePassword;
#Bean
public RestTemplate someRestTemplate() {
RestTemplate restTemplate = new RestTemplate();
restTemplate.getInterceptors().add(
new BasicAuthorizationInterceptor(someUsername, somePassword));
return restTemplate;
}
}
Test Configuration Class
#RunWith(SpringRunner.class)
#SpringBootTest(webEnvironment = SpringBootTest.WebEnvironment.NONE)
public class SomeTest {
#SpringBootConfiguration
#Import({MySpringBootApp.class, SomeConfiguration.class})
static class TestConfiguration {
#Autowired
private ConfigurableEnvironment configurableEnvironment;
// This doesn't work:
#Bean
#Lazy(false)
// I also tried a #PostConstruct method
public TargetPropertiesPropertySource targetPropertiesPropertySource() {
TargetPropertiesPropertySource customPropertySource =
new TargetPropertiesPropertySource();
configurableEnvironment.getPropertySources().addFirst(customPropertySource);
return customPropertySource;
}
}
}
You can override properties directly in the #SpringBootTest annotation using the properties parameter:
#SpringBootTest(properties = {"some.username=user", "some.password=pwd"},
webEnvironment = SpringBootTest.WebEnvironment.NONE)
You can use #TestPropertySource
#TestPropertySource(
properties = {
"some.username=validate",
"some.password=false"
}
)
#RunWith(SpringRunner.class)
#SpringBootTest(webEnvironment = WebEnvironment.RANDOM_PORT)
public class ApplicationTest {
//...
}
You can use constructor injection in production cases, which allows it to set the configuration manually:
#Configuration
public class SomeConfiguration {
private final String someUsername;
private final String somePassword;
#Autowired
public SomeConfiguration(#Value("${some.username}") String someUsername,
#Value("${some.password}") String somePassword) {
this.someUsername = someUsername;
this.somePassword = somePassword;
}
...
)
}
#RunWith(SpringRunner.class)
#SpringBootTest(webEnvironment = SpringBootTest.WebEnvironment.NONE)
public class SomeTest {
private SomeConfiguration config;
#Before
public init() {
config = new SomeConfiguration("foo", "bar");
}
}

Arquillian with Mockito and CDI

Is it possible to create spy(mock) object in testing class?
Here is tested class.
#Stateless
#Slf4j
public class UserDao {
#Inject
private TestBean testBean;
public String mock() {
return testBean.mock();
}
public String notMock() {
return testBean.notMock();
}
}
TestBean code
#Stateless
#Slf4j
public class TestBean {
public String notMock() {
return "NOT MOCK";
}
public String mock() {
return "IMPLEMENTED MOCK";
}
}
Here's my test
#RunWith(Arquillian.class)
public class UserDataTest {
#Rule
public ExpectedException thrown = ExpectedException.none();
#Inject
private UserDao userDao;
#Deployment
protected static Archive createWar() {
File[] dependencies = Maven.configureResolver()
.withRemoteRepo("nexus-remote", "http://maven.wideup.net/nexus/content/groups/public/", "default")
.withRemoteRepo("nexus-release", "http://maven.wideup.net/nexus/content/repositories/releases/", "default")
.resolve(
"org.slf4j:slf4j-simple:1.7.7",
"eu.bitwalker:UserAgentUtils:1.15",
"org.mockito:mockito-all:1.10.8"
).withoutTransitivity().asFile();
return ShrinkWrap
.create(WebArchive.class, "pass.jpa.war")
.addAsWebInfResource("jbossas-ds.xml")
.addAsWebInfResource("jboss-deployment-structure.xml")
.addAsLibraries(
PassApiDeployments.createDefaultDeployment(),
PassUtilLibrary.createDefaultDeployment(),
PassJpaDeployments.createDefaultDeployment()
).addAsLibraries(dependencies);
}
#Test
public void testMock() {
assertEquals("MOCK", userDao.mock());
}
#Test
public void testNotMock() {
assertEquals("NOT MOCK", userDao.notMock());
}
}
I'd like to create a spy object on TestBean to change result on method test() of this bean.
So is it possible to create TestBean spy in UserDao.
I solve some problems through producer like this.
#Singleton
public class MockFactory {
#Produces
#ArquillianAlternative
public TestBean getTestBean() {
return when(mock(TestBean.class).mock()).thenReturn("MOCK").getMock();
}
}
But in this example I need create on Bean completely on my own. And if it is bean with additional dependencies and thus i will manage all dependencies.
As far as I know, its not possible to use a mocking framework in combination with arquillian ...
I haven't used it myself, but this Arquillian extension seems to be specifically designed to support Mockito Spy objects in an Arquillian test: https://github.com/topikachu/arquillian-extension-mockito/

Google Guice, Interceptors and PrivateModules

New poster here, hope I don't brake any rules :)
I am using PrivateModule in google-guice in order to have multiple DataSource's for the same environment. But I am having a hard time getting MethodInterceptor's to work inside the private modules.
Below is a simple test case that explains the "problem".
A simple service class would be:
interface Service {
String go();
}
class ServiceImpl implements Service {
#Override #Transactional
public String go() {
return "Test Case...";
}
}
The MyModule class would be:
class MyModule extends AbstractModule {
#Override
protected void configure() {
install(new PrivateModule() {
#Override
protected void configure() {
bind(Service.class).to(ServiceImpl.class);
bindInterceptor(
Matchers.any(),
Matchers.annotatedWith(Transactional.class),
new MethodInterceptor() {
#Override
public Object invoke(MethodInvocation i)
throws Throwable {
System.out.println("Intercepting: "
+ i.getMethod().getName());
return i.proceed();
}
});
expose(Service.class);
}
});
}
}
And the final test case:
public class TestCase {
#Inject Service service;
public TestCase() {
Guice.createInjector(new MyModule()).injectMembers(this);
}
public String go() {
return service.go();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
TestCase t = new TestCase();
System.out.println(t.go());
}
}
You would expect the output to be:
Intercepting: go
Test Case...
But it doesn't happen, the interceptor is not used, ant only Test Case... is output.
If I bind/expose the ServiceImpl instead of the interface then it works.
Thanks in advance,
Regards,
LL
Well... I figured it out shortly after I posted the question :)
The problem is that you also need to expose() the ServiceImpl class.
So the bind/expose would be.
bind(ServiceImpl.class); // ServiceImpl annotated with #Singleton
bind(Service.class).to(ServiceImpl.class);
expose(ServiceImpl.class);
expose(Service.class);
Regards,
LL
You need to explicitly bind ServiceImpl in the private module. The problem with your existing code is that it inherits the binding for ServiceImpl from the parent module. From the PrivateModule docs,
Private modules are implemented using parent injectors. When it can satisfy their dependencies, just-in-time bindings will be created in the root environment. Such bindings are shared among all environments in the tree.
Adding this line should fix the problem:
bind(ServiceImpl.class);