Spring Boot 2.1.0 readonly transactions behaviour change
With the Upgrade from Spring Boot 2.0.6 to 2.1.0 there is a change of the readOnly flag handling. The code below saves the Customer successfully where the same code in 2.1.0 does not. In 2.1.0 the save method only returns the same Customer entity without the id column filled.
The cause is maybe related to this ticket:
https://jira.spring.io/browse/SPR-16956
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class CustomerService {
private final CustomerRepository customerRepository;
public CustomerService(CustomerRepository customerRepository) {
this.customerRepository = customerRepository;
}
public Customer save(Customer customer) {
return customerRepository.save(customer);
}
}
Also if you have one service where the readOnly flag is set to true which calls another service where the readOnly flag is set to false there are no data saved.
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
While this new behaviour is maybe correct it breaks existing application without notice. So my questions are:
- Is the behaviour correct?
- Is it possible to configure Spring in a way that it throws an exception if you try to save data in a read only transaction.
- If the behaviour is correct should Spring check if you call a method with a 'readonly=false' from another method which is configured as a readOnly transaction?
java spring hibernate spring-boot spring-transactions
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
add a comment |
With the Upgrade from Spring Boot 2.0.6 to 2.1.0 there is a change of the readOnly flag handling. The code below saves the Customer successfully where the same code in 2.1.0 does not. In 2.1.0 the save method only returns the same Customer entity without the id column filled.
The cause is maybe related to this ticket:
https://jira.spring.io/browse/SPR-16956
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class CustomerService {
private final CustomerRepository customerRepository;
public CustomerService(CustomerRepository customerRepository) {
this.customerRepository = customerRepository;
}
public Customer save(Customer customer) {
return customerRepository.save(customer);
}
}
Also if you have one service where the readOnly flag is set to true which calls another service where the readOnly flag is set to false there are no data saved.
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
While this new behaviour is maybe correct it breaks existing application without notice. So my questions are:
- Is the behaviour correct?
- Is it possible to configure Spring in a way that it throws an exception if you try to save data in a read only transaction.
- If the behaviour is correct should Spring check if you call a method with a 'readonly=false' from another method which is configured as a readOnly transaction?
java spring hibernate spring-boot spring-transactions
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
1. Yes, 2. No. 3. No. Readonly is also only a hint, depending on the underlying technology used it might (or might not) work or throw an error. Spring delegates all that to the underlying data store technology.
– M. Deinum
Nov 21 '18 at 19:30
add a comment |
With the Upgrade from Spring Boot 2.0.6 to 2.1.0 there is a change of the readOnly flag handling. The code below saves the Customer successfully where the same code in 2.1.0 does not. In 2.1.0 the save method only returns the same Customer entity without the id column filled.
The cause is maybe related to this ticket:
https://jira.spring.io/browse/SPR-16956
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class CustomerService {
private final CustomerRepository customerRepository;
public CustomerService(CustomerRepository customerRepository) {
this.customerRepository = customerRepository;
}
public Customer save(Customer customer) {
return customerRepository.save(customer);
}
}
Also if you have one service where the readOnly flag is set to true which calls another service where the readOnly flag is set to false there are no data saved.
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
While this new behaviour is maybe correct it breaks existing application without notice. So my questions are:
- Is the behaviour correct?
- Is it possible to configure Spring in a way that it throws an exception if you try to save data in a read only transaction.
- If the behaviour is correct should Spring check if you call a method with a 'readonly=false' from another method which is configured as a readOnly transaction?
java spring hibernate spring-boot spring-transactions
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
With the Upgrade from Spring Boot 2.0.6 to 2.1.0 there is a change of the readOnly flag handling. The code below saves the Customer successfully where the same code in 2.1.0 does not. In 2.1.0 the save method only returns the same Customer entity without the id column filled.
The cause is maybe related to this ticket:
https://jira.spring.io/browse/SPR-16956
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class CustomerService {
private final CustomerRepository customerRepository;
public CustomerService(CustomerRepository customerRepository) {
this.customerRepository = customerRepository;
}
public Customer save(Customer customer) {
return customerRepository.save(customer);
}
}
Also if you have one service where the readOnly flag is set to true which calls another service where the readOnly flag is set to false there are no data saved.
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = true)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
@Service
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public class FirstService {
private final SecondService secondService;
@Transactional(readOnly = false)
public Foo save(Foo foo) {
return secondService.save(foo);
}
}
While this new behaviour is maybe correct it breaks existing application without notice. So my questions are:
- Is the behaviour correct?
- Is it possible to configure Spring in a way that it throws an exception if you try to save data in a read only transaction.
- If the behaviour is correct should Spring check if you call a method with a 'readonly=false' from another method which is configured as a readOnly transaction?
java spring hibernate spring-boot spring-transactions
java spring hibernate spring-boot spring-transactions
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
asked Nov 21 '18 at 19:20
meleagrosmeleagros
182216
182216
1. Yes, 2. No. 3. No. Readonly is also only a hint, depending on the underlying technology used it might (or might not) work or throw an error. Spring delegates all that to the underlying data store technology.
– M. Deinum
Nov 21 '18 at 19:30
add a comment |
1. Yes, 2. No. 3. No. Readonly is also only a hint, depending on the underlying technology used it might (or might not) work or throw an error. Spring delegates all that to the underlying data store technology.
– M. Deinum
Nov 21 '18 at 19:30
1. Yes, 2. No. 3. No. Readonly is also only a hint, depending on the underlying technology used it might (or might not) work or throw an error. Spring delegates all that to the underlying data store technology.
– M. Deinum
Nov 21 '18 at 19:30
1. Yes, 2. No. 3. No. Readonly is also only a hint, depending on the underlying technology used it might (or might not) work or throw an error. Spring delegates all that to the underlying data store technology.
– M. Deinum
Nov 21 '18 at 19:30
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53419174%2fspring-boot-2-1-0-readonly-transactions-behaviour-change%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53419174%2fspring-boot-2-1-0-readonly-transactions-behaviour-change%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1. Yes, 2. No. 3. No. Readonly is also only a hint, depending on the underlying technology used it might (or might not) work or throw an error. Spring delegates all that to the underlying data store technology.
– M. Deinum
Nov 21 '18 at 19:30