Le jeu. 24 nov. 2022 à 16:58, Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org> a écrit :
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 10:19 AM Romain Manni-Bucau > <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Le jeu. 24 nov. 2022 à 10:13, Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org> a écrit : > > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:10 AM Romain Manni-Bucau > > > <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Well, it is not that simple. > > > > > > > > Two notes on that: > > > > > > > > 1. One point is the API, injector and instance manager are the exact > same > > > > API if you want a generic API so not sure it should be duplicated > with > > > > different names (or said otherwise the Injector API is not generic > enough > > > > to be worth a tomcat "core" change IMHO) > > > > > > This is indeed the same API. > > > Tomcat standalone handles Jakarta Annotations here: > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/tomcat/blob/main/java/org/apache/catalina/core/DefaultInstanceManager.java#L174 > > > The owb integration is supposed to do the CDI annotations on the same > > > spot. AFAIK, it works. Except that the PostConstruct will be done > > > later. > > > I don't want to duplicate DefaultInstanceManager since there are a lot > > > of privileged actions and code in there. So adding the callback on > > > line 174 does seem fine to me. > > > > > > > 2. the post construct is a conflict between tomcat world and cdi > world > > > > there but you have the same "conflict" (= concurrent world/handling) > for > > > > injections, i.e. tomcat handles persistence context, persistence > unit, > > > > webservice ref etc but CDI can also handle it so the injector is > either > > > > incomplete in one case (cdi without these handling) and should be > > > combined > > > > between tomcat and injector OR it is done twice, potentially > differently. > > > > > > > > So at the end it looks like you don't have the choice to just own the > > > > instance manager to ensure it is done properly so making it easier to > > > > instantiate is likely the way to go but adding an abstraction which > is > > > not > > > > generic is maybe not helping as much as it can look like upfront. > > > > > > > > Side note: meecrowave does a more cdi instantiation: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/openwebbeans-meecrowave/blob/master/meecrowave-core/src/main/java/org/apache/meecrowave/tomcat/CDIInstanceManager.java > > > > and it is very few lines so not sure the injector would help much > more > > > for > > > > a tomcat-cdi integration. > > > > > > Sure, but the problem is that I have to keep DefaultInstanceManager > > > around, and I won't replace everything with a CDI implementation. > > > > > > > Well, in the owb module you will have to - previous impl is more about > > letting cdi handling the postconstruct but lack the JNDI support to be > > complete - to solve the double/conflict injection point anyway. The > > *Injector* API does not solve it so not sure there is much space for this > > invalid by design API :s. Did you find a way to solve it? > > I don't understand everything in this area. > I tried a Servlet with a @PostConstruct. Tomcat's > DefaultInstanceManager invokes that method. > If OWB is active through the listener on that webapp, and processes > that Servlet instance for injection (there's nothing to inject of > course), then it does not invoke that @PostConstruct. Why is that ? > Does it only do it on beans where it actually did some injection ? > If you speak of the tomcat/module impl it is because it uses owb.inject only and not the unmanaged API (or injectiontarget which is equivalent). The issues start when you have such a bean (whatever component it is, a servlet, filter, listener): public class FooComponent ... { @Inject MyBean service; @Resource DataSource dataSource; // from web.xml for ex @Resource(lookup = "entries/conf)" String conf; // from context.xml for ex @PostConstruct void onInit() {} @PreDestroy void onDestroy() {} } Here you want: 1. newInstance somehow 2.a. inject cdi instances 2.b. inject tomcat instances 3. postconstruct .... 4. predestroy 5. release creation context if relevant (not normal scoped bean mainly) 2.a and b only work if you have 2 injectors (or chain the injections in instance manager since it is equivalent) but the trick is that OWB can handle tomcat injections - it has API/plugins for part of that - or tomcat can handle OWB injections. You also have the hybrid case: @Inject @Resource Foo bar; is not forbidden by the spec and is a valid CDI case - where an extension can make @Resource a qualifier. So at the end, the only proper way to make this working is to make the tomcat injections handled properly either by making tomcat aware of the CDI model (using annotated type for ex and using it to filter out injections to not do) or to just let CDI handle all injections importing the tomcat JNDI support in CDI - that's what TomEE does. But in all cases, Injector API does not solve the injection issue and it is likely than solving the injection issue you will end up with a postconstruct handling which would be a one liner (thanks CDI injection target for ex) and then just trivial to do in instance manager. Another not well defined case would be the exact same but using the constructor to get injection, this is fine for CDI but guess spec integration is vague enough to not handle it explicitly. > > Rémy > > > > > > > > > > > Rémy > > > > > > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > > > > < > > > > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Le mer. 23 nov. 2022 à 10:56, Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org> a > écrit : > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 6:08 PM Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > > <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, how is your injector different from an InstanceManager? ( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/tomcat/blob/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/InstanceManager.java > > > > > > ) > > > > > > Only by not having all `newInstance` flavors? > > > > > > > > > > The plan is to keep on using DefaultInstanceManager since OWB only > > > > > needs a callback for injection (before PostConstruct) and destroy > (to > > > > > remove the instance from the map). Otherwise the whole > InstanceManager > > > > > has to be replaced (and done better than the current one since the > > > > > PostConstruct calls cannot be in the right order otherwise). > > > > > > > > > > > Will also need the backgroundProcess (cache cleanup, same as > instance > > > > > > manager) and similarly the calling context (new instance > params), in > > > > > > particular the classloader. > > > > > > This is why I said it sounds more like a single API and more > hooking > > > the > > > > > > default instance to enable what you want or just redo it is > likely > > > > > simpler > > > > > > _on an API standpoint_. > > > > > > Guess postConstruct() method as in TomEE impl - but using tomcat > in > > > place > > > > > > method, just exposing it - can be sufficient and keep the API > clean > > > if > > > > > you > > > > > > don't want to reimpl anything. > > > > > > > > > > This is only a callback for injection with DefaultInstanceManager. > > > > > Implementing your own InstanceManager in TomEE is still needed and > > > > > since it is not using DefaultInstanceManager this callback API is > not > > > > > available at all. Also it will not break existing InstanceManager > > > > > implementations (even ones that extend DefaultInstanceManager), so > > > > > that's another thing I had to consider. > > > > > > > > > > The user who got me into this is here: > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/1g4bpj3jnmmmxkh37qvwzoplqo65ldot > > > > > This is about Weld, but after having a look the > > > > > OpenWebBeansInstanceManager does the same thing. Then I realized > > > > > unless the InstanceManager was fully replaced there would be no > way to > > > > > implement the proper ordering. > > > > > > > > > > > About JSP hack, it is more general but hits mainly JSP: it is > about > > > > > tomcat > > > > > > specific JNDI injections, the workaround and wiring used > elsewhere > > > for > > > > > > beans didn't work properly for JSP. Guess you don't have this > issue > > > but > > > > > > something making it easier to handle can also probably be > welcomed by > > > > > > consumers. > > > > > > > > > > Ok. > > > > > > > > > > Rémy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 17:26, Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org> a > > > écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 4:30 PM Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > > > > <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Rémy, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I put a few comments inline hoping it helps > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Le mar. 22 nov. 2022 à 16:11, Rémy Maucherat < > r...@apache.org> a > > > > > écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Following a post on the user list, I have looked into CDI > and > > > > > > > > > injection processing in Tomcat standalone (or standalone > > > extended > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > CDI) and found the following issues: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) metadata-complete is done wrong. The spec got retconned > some > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > ago and metadata-complete only means Servlet spec defining > > > > > metadata, > > > > > > > > > such as @WebServlet (= the ones that require scanning all > > > classes > > > > > just > > > > > > > > > in case). So in practice inside DefaultInstanceManager the > > > > > > > > > ignoreAnnotations flag shouldn't be used at all and it > should > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > be removed. I am ok on only doing this in 11 ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) CDI is not intertwined with the DefaultInstanceManager. > > > > > Basically > > > > > > > > > as the user said, injections should be done *before* > > > > > @PostConstruct, > > > > > > > > > and it . There's a (minor) problem with the > > > DefaultInstanceManager > > > > > > > > > API, a method needs to be protected and then integrations > will > > > > > then be > > > > > > > > > able to hack inside the DefaultInstanceManager. You can see > > > this > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > in the OWB integration: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/tomcat/blob/main/modules/owb/src/main/java/org/apache/webbeans/web/tomcat/OpenWebBeansInstanceManager.java#L102 > > > > > > > > > (basically, first call newInstance, because there's no > other > > > way, > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > inject, but newInstance will have already invoked > > > @PostConstruct). > > > > > To > > > > > > > > > fix this, I plan to add an Injector interface to > > > > > > > > > DefaultInstanceManager since this is pretty much the only > way > > > to do > > > > > > > > > this cleanly in Tomcat standalone (taking over the whole > > > > > > > > > DefaultInstanceManager is clearly not the best idea). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, TomEE ([1]) had some hard time with JSP due to that > and its > > > > > > > > re-implementation of the instantiation. > > > > > > > > Basically the idea was to implement it aside Tomcat default > impl > > > but > > > > > for > > > > > > > > some classes it was not convenient enough. > > > > > > > > That said I have to admit I'm not sure it needs a new concept > > > > > (injector) > > > > > > > > because basically it will copy the instance manager API > (inject, > > > > > release > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > something like that since it is not only about the inject > phase > > > so > > > > > either > > > > > > > > you define the lifecycle or you store a Runnable you call at > > > release > > > > > time > > > > > > > > too - isnt the abstraction too complex then?). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For EE or some other similar embedded, the assumption was that > > > > > > > InstanceManager would be fully reimplemented. But this is more > work > > > > > > > for a lighter weight integration, ok. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The change to add the API to DefaultInstanceManager would be: > > > > > > > --- a/java/org/apache/catalina/core/DefaultInstanceManager.java > > > > > > > +++ b/java/org/apache/catalina/core/DefaultInstanceManager.java > > > > > > > @@ -109,6 +109,7 @@ public class DefaultInstanceManager > implements > > > > > > > InstanceManager { > > > > > > > new ManagedConcurrentWeakHashMap<>(); > > > > > > > private final Map<String, String> postConstructMethods; > > > > > > > private final Map<String, String> preDestroyMethods; > > > > > > > + private Injector injector = null; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > public DefaultInstanceManager(Context context, > > > > > > > Map<String, Map<String, String>> injectionMap, > > > > > > > @@ -172,6 +173,9 @@ public class DefaultInstanceManager > implements > > > > > > > InstanceManager { > > > > > > > Map<String, String> injections = > > > > > > > assembleInjectionsFromClassHierarchy(clazz); > > > > > > > populateAnnotationsCache(clazz, injections); > > > > > > > processAnnotations(instance, injections); > > > > > > > + if (injector != null) { > > > > > > > + injector.inject(instance); > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > postConstruct(instance, clazz); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > return instance; > > > > > > > @@ -193,6 +197,9 @@ public class DefaultInstanceManager > implements > > > > > > > InstanceManager { > > > > > > > @Override > > > > > > > public void destroyInstance(Object instance) throws > > > > > > > IllegalAccessException, > > > > > > > InvocationTargetException { > > > > > > > + if (injector != null) { > > > > > > > + injector.destroy(instance); > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > if (!ignoreAnnotations) { > > > > > > > preDestroy(instance, instance.getClass()); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > @@ -828,4 +835,16 @@ public class DefaultInstanceManager > implements > > > > > > > InstanceManager { > > > > > > > return loadClass(className, classLoader); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + public void setInjector(Injector injector) { > > > > > > > + if (injector == null) { > > > > > > > + this.injector = injector; > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + public interface Injector { > > > > > > > + void inject(Object instance); > > > > > > > + void destroy(Object instance); > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simply allowing inject and destroy callbacks on the main > > > > > > > DefaultInstanceManager, which is what the OWBInstanceManager > > > > > > > integration does (except it cannot do it in the right order for > > > > > > > injection, which is what the user complained about). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another issue there is that newInstance assumes a "new" which > > > means > > > > > you > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > not use a CDI instance generally speaking, only a banalised > > > instance > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > gets injections so it means you can just impl yourself a > > > > > > > > newInstance+whatever you want+postconstruct call (this is > light > > > > > > > actually). > > > > > > > > This is where setting ignoreAnnotations would be quite fancy > in > > > your > > > > > own > > > > > > > > instance manager and wouldnt need any new API. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it clearly relies on the behavior of > DefaultInstanceManager. > > > > > > > OTOH, maybe it's good to keep ignoreAnnotations as a real > "ignore > > > all > > > > > > > annotations I know what I am doing", but decouple it from the > > > > > > > matadata-complete from EE. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That said, enabling to use a CDI instance would be way more > > > powerful > > > > > and > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > not against the spec - it is actually not specified AFAIK. > > > > > > > > Indeed it would need a toggle on the OWBIM of Tomcat > integration > > > but > > > > > it > > > > > > > > would also open way more doors in terms of usage because your > > > servlet > > > > > > > > (filter, ...) is now a CDI beans with a connection to its > bus and > > > > > > > > interceptors. > > > > > > > > I know it can already be done by using a container > initializer > > > which > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > beans injected and the instances directly passed to the > > > addServlet() > > > > > > > > (instead of the class) but it would also be a very valuable > > > addition > > > > > to > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > module if the instantiation is reworked so I'm just > mentionning > > > it > > > > > as an > > > > > > > > opportunity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/main/tomee/tomee-catalina/src/main/java/org/apache/tomee/catalina/JavaeeInstanceManager.java > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking at the code, it seems reasonable to have a custom > instance > > > > > > > manager for TomEE as it does more than simply inject. About JSP > > > > > > > specifically, I'm not sure I understand the problem but that's > ok. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rémy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The impact of fixing these for users should be > non-existent: > > > it is > > > > > > > > > really a Tomcat standalone only thing impacting users with > some > > > > > very > > > > > > > > > precise EE needs. A full EE integration will simply take > over > > > the > > > > > > > > > whole annotation processing and instance manager from > Tomcat, > > > and > > > > > > > > > hopefully do The Right Thing already. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Although this is not super critical, I plan to address > these > > > > > issues in > > > > > > > > > the OWB integration (after adding the needed API change in > > > Tomcat's > > > > > > > > > DefaultInstanceManager). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Comments ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rémy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > >
