I'm looking to be able to add a request-scoped attribute (a JAX-RS ContainerRequestContext because I would rather use Jackson to convert my parameters to objects than JAX-RS's ill conceived and clunky ParameterConverterProviders) to a DeserializationContext so that it can be obtained from within a JsonDeserializer. I must call convertValue() rather than simply readValue() (not dealing with actual JSON) so I am not able to create an ObjectReader in each thread unless I am willing to serialize my map to a JSON string first and then read it back -which would be incredibly inefficient.
I'd like to be able to do something that accomplishes the following but in a per request manner:
ObjectMapper om = new ObjectMapper();
//in request-scoped context:
om.getDeserializationContext().setAttribute("requestContext",containerRequestContext)
Map<String,Object> mapOfRequestParameters = ...
BeanOfVastImportance bean = om.convertValue(mapOfRequestParameters,BeanOfVastImportance.class)
How can I achieve this without the massive, superfluous overhead of needing to create a new ObjectMapper for each individual request thread?
This may be achieved with:
objectMapper.reader().forType(Request.class)
.withAttribute("key", "value").readValue<Request>("source")
Related
I am referring to api
Patters.ask(actor, msg, duration);
here is sample
class MyActor extends AbstractBehavior{
interface Command{}
interface SomeMessage implements Command{ INSTANCE}
public Reveive<Comamnd> receive(){
return newReceiveBuilder().onMessage(SomeMessage.class, this::someMessage).build();
}
private Behavior<Command> someMessage(SomeMessage ref){
System.out.println("Dru lalal");
}
}
ActorRef<MyActor.Command> myActor = ...;
Future<Object> future = Patterns.ask(myActor, SomeMessage.INSTANCE, Duration.ofMillis(10000));
What is gone be object ?
Obviously this won't compile. Some part of picture is missing, but javadoc doesn't state what.
Call "Patterns.ask" suppose to return future with object, those value is provided by actor as business logic. But there is not business logic in actor. I assume there is suppose to be some kind of convention or mapping for method that returns value with what "Patters.ask" triggers.
Same is true about back logic. I will not able to define receiver since it expect to return Receiver not SomeObject and thus, api want't let me bind result to some message. Only thing I can do is manually pass ComputableFuture
ComputableFuture<MyOBject> future = new ComputableFuture<>();
myActor.tell(new Message(future));
private Behavior<Command> someMessage(Message message){
var result = compute();
message.future.comlete(result);
}
And here we go, I have manually manage everything, also issues with passing non serializable message, lifecycle of objects and so on.
Wrong objects is used. Instead of "AskPattern.ask" for new java typed dsl, I used classic "Patterns.ask".
Most of times new api objects has same object name but located in different package. I used to check only package name becouse while playing with in IDE they always next to each other since name is the same. I got used to ignore the classic "com.akka" objects while playing with api.
And here I got into trap, object name is different and not placed in IDE next to "classic" package object.
I'm trying to write some tooling for Crystal (specifically Kemal) where I can see if the response content type is text/html and modify the response body thats has already been written to the HTTP::Response before it is sent to the client by injecting an HTML element into the existing html response body.
I've noticed that HTTP::Server::Response is write-only, but things like Gzip::Writer are able to modify the body.
How can I modify the HTTP::Server::Response html body before it is sent to the client?
It's written in Crystal, so let's just take a look at the source on how others do this.
Taking the CompressHandler as an example, the basic idea is to replace the response's IO with something that allows the desired control:
context.response.output = Gzip::Writer.new(context.response.output, sync_close: true)
# ...
call_next(context)
So how can we make use of that to modify the response that's being written?
A naive (and slow) example would be to just keep hold of the original output and provide a IO::Memory instead:
client = context.response.output
io = IO::Memory.new
context.response.output = io
call_next(context)
body = io.to_s
new_body = inject_html(body)
client.print new_body
Of course that would only work when this handler comes before any handler that turns the response into non-plaintext (like the above CompressHandler).
A smarter solution would provide a custom IO implementation that just wraps the original IO, watching what's written to it and inject whatever it wants to inject at the right point. Examples of such wrapping IOs can be found at IO::Delimited, IO::Sized and IO::MultieWriter among others, the pattern is really common to prevent unnecessary allocations.
I need to do a callout to webservice from my ApexController class. To do this, I have an asycn method with attribute #future (callout=true). The webservice call needs to refeence an object that gets populated in save call from VF page.
Since, static (future) calls does not all objects to be passed in as method argument, I was planning to add the data in a static Map and access that in my static method to do a webservice call out. However, the static Map object is getting re-initalized and is null in the static method.
I will really appreciate if anyone can give me some pointeres on how to address this issue.
Thanks!
Here is the code snipped:
private static Map<String, WidgetModels.LeadInformation> leadsMap;
....
......
public PageReference save() {
if(leadsMap == null){
leadsMap = new Map<String, WidgetModels.LeadInformation>();
}
leadsMap.put(guid,widgetLead);
}
//make async call to Widegt Webservice
saveWidgetCallInformation(guid)
//async call to widge webserivce
#future (callout=true)
public static void saveWidgetCallInformation(String guid) {
WidgetModels.LeadInformation cachedLeadInfo =
(WidgetModels.LeadInformation)leadsMap.get(guid);
.....
//call websevice
}
#future is totally separate execution context. It won't have access to any history of how it was called (meaning all static variables are reset, you start with fresh governor limits etc. Like a new action initiated by the user).
The only thing it will "know" is the method parameters that were passed to it. And you can't pass whole objects, you need to pass primitives (Integer, String, DateTime etc) or collections of primitives (List, Set, Map).
If you can access all the info you need from the database - just pass a List<Id> for example and query it.
If you can't - you can cheat by serializing your objects and passing them as List<String>. Check the documentation around JSON class or these 2 handy posts:
https://developer.salesforce.com/blogs/developer-relations/2013/06/passing-objects-to-future-annotated-methods.html
https://gist.github.com/kevinohara80/1790817
Side note - can you rethink your flow? If the starting point is Visualforce you can skip the #future step. Do the callout first and then the DML (if needed). That way the usual "you have uncommitted work pending" error won't be triggered. This thing is there not only to annoy developers ;) It's there to make you rethink your design. You're asking the application to have open transaction & lock on the table(s) for up to 2 minutes. And you're giving yourself extra work - will you rollback your changes correctly when the insert went OK but callout failed?
By reversing the order of operations (callout first, then the DML) you're making it simpler - there was no save attempt to DB so there's nothing to roll back if the save fails.
I have a List (e.g. the output of a database query) variable, which I use to create actors (they could be many and they are varied). I use the following code (in TestedActor preStart()), the actor qualified name is from the List variable as an example):
Class<?> classobject = Class.forName("com.java.anything.actor.MyActor"); //create class from name string
ActorRef actref = getContext().actorOf(Props.create(classobject), actorname); //creation
the code was tested:
#Test
public void testPreStart() throws Exception {
final Props props = Props.create(TestedActor.class);
final TestActorRef<TestedActor > ref = TestActorRef.create(system, props, "testA");
#SuppressWarnings("unused")
final TestedActor actor = ref.underlyingActor();
}
EDIT : it is working fine (contrary to the previous post, where I have seen a timeout error, it turned out as an unrelated alarm).
I have googled some posts related to this issue (e.g. suggesting the usage of newInstance), however I am still confused as these were superseded by mentioning it as a bad pattern. So, I am looking for a solution in java, which is also safe from the akka point of view (or the confirmation of the above pattern).
Maybe if you would write us why you need to create those actors this way it would help to find the solution.
Actually most people will tell you that using reflection is not the best idea. Sometimes it's the only option but you should avoid it.
Maybe this would be a solution for you:
Since actors are really cheap you can create all of them upfront. How many of them do you have?
Now the query could return you a path to the actor, not the class. Select it with actorSelection and send messages to it.
If your actors does a long running job you can use a router or if you want to a Proxy Actor that will spawn other actors as needed. Other option is to create futures from a single actor.
It really depends on the case, because you may need to create multiple execution context's not to starve any of the actors (of futures).
I'm writing a little clojure pub/sub interface. It's very barebones, only two methods that will actually be used: do-pub and sub-listen. sub-listen takes a string (a sub name) and do-pub takes two strings (a sub name and a value).
I'm still fairly new at clojure and am having some trouble coming up with a workable way to do this. My first thought (and indeed my first implementation) uses a single agent which holds a hash:
{ subname (promise1 promise2 etc) }
When a thread wants to sub it conj's a promise object to the list associated with the sub it wants, then immediately tries to de-reference that promise (therefore blocking).
When a pub happens it goes through every item in the list for the sub and delivers the value to that item (the promise). It then dissoc's that subname from the map and returns it to the agent.
In this way I got a simple pub sub implementation working. However, the problem comes when someone subs, doesn't receive a pub for a certain amount of time, then gets killed due to timeout. In this scenario there will be a worthless promise in the agent that doesn't need to be, and moreover this will be a source of a memory leak if that sub never gets pub'd.
Does anyone have any thoughts on how to solve this? Or if there is a better way to do what I'm trying to do overall (I'm trying to avoid using any external pre-cooked pubsub libraries, this is a pet project not a work one)?
You can do something like this:
Create an atom
publish function will update the atom value by the passed in value to the function
Subscribers can use add-watch on the atom to be notified of when the atom value changes i.e due to call to publish function
Use remove-watch to remove the subscription.
This way you will have a very basic pub-sub system.
I have marked Ankur's answer as the solution but I wanted to expand on it a bit. What I ended up doing is having a central atom that all client threads do an add-watch on. When a pub is done the atom's value is changed to a vector containing the name of the sub and the value being pub'd.
The function the clients pass to add-watch is a partial function which looks like
(partial (fn [prom sub key ref _old new] ...) sub prom)
where prom is a promise previously generated. The client then blocks while waiting on that promise. The partial function checks if the sub in new is the same as sub, if so it removes the watch and delivers on the promise with the value from new.