[Springframework-developer] Trying again. Difference in advised behavior btwn ProxyFactoryBean and TransactionProxyFactoryBean??

[Tim K. <tim...@vi...>]

I hate to come off sounding like a broken record here, but I asked about
this issue last week in the hopes that someone could elaborate further =
on
it, but didn=92t get any reply on it.  I=92m thinking maybe it got lost =
in the
events over the weekend, so I=92m re-posting both emails I sent below, =
in the
hopes that someone might afford a look at it and point me in the right
direction.  Thanks in advance!

In a nutshell, I'm seeing different behavior on how interceptors are =
applied
to an proxy object purely based on whether it is using ProxyFactoryBean =
or
TransactionProxyFactoryBean. (details are in the email below)


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ORIGINAL EMAIL (SEE FOLLOWUP EMAIL AFTER THIS ONE) =
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
I'm running into some rather unusual behavior that I cannot explain - so =
I
thought I'd bring it up here, either I'm doing something wrong, or there =
(a
far more remote possibility) is something wrong w/ Spring.

I previously had an object that was wrapped in a
TransactionProxyFactoryBean, and this object also had an Acegi security
method interceptor applied to it.=A0=20

In my refactoring of the code to move the transactional concerns to a =
higher
abstraction layer, I changed the object wrapper from
TransactionProxyFactoryBean to ProxyFactoryBean.=A0 Since I wanted to =
keep the
Acegi method interceptor at this level, I upated the 'postInterceptors'
property to 'interceptorNames', and set the name of the Acegi =
interceptor in
there.=A0=20

from this:

=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <property name=3D"postInterceptors">
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <list>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <ref =
bean=3D"serviceMethodSecurityInterceptor"/>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 </list>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 </property>

to this:

=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <property name=3D"interceptorNames">
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <list>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =
<value>serviceMethodSecurityInterceptor</value>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 </list>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 </property>

Some of the test cases I have broke after this change.=A0 I started =
digging
around a bit to find out why, and what I've turned up, to the best I can
figure out is that when applying an interceptor via 'interceptorNames', =
the
interceptor gets selectively applied.=A0=A0=A0 This is the configuration =
for the
method interceptor.=A0 As you can see, we are applying access control on =
three
different methods.=A0 'get', 'getTopicList' and 'getTopicChildren'.=A0=20

=A0=A0=A0 <bean id=3D"serviceMethodSecurityInterceptor"
class=3D"net.sf.acegisecurity.intercept.method.aopalliance.MethodSecurity=
Inter
ceptor">
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <property name=3D"authenticationManager"><ref
bean=3D"authenticationManager"/></property>
=A0=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <property name=3D"accessDecisionManager"><ref
bean=3D"decisionManager"/></property>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <property name=3D"afterInvocationManager"><ref
bean=3D"afterInvocationManager"/></property>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <property name=3D"objectDefinitionSource">
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 <value>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =
com.vivakos.vps.service.Service.get=3DTOPIC_AFTER_ACL_READ
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0
com.vivakos.vps.service.content.TopicService.getTopicList=3DTOPIC_AFTER_A=
CL_RE
AD
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0
com.vivakos.vps.service.content.TopicService.getTopicChildren=3DTOPIC_AFT=
ER_AC
L_READ
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 </value>
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 </property>
=A0=A0=A0 </bean>=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0=20

And as far as I can see - when using TransactionProxyFactoryBean, all =
three
methods get applied correctly.=A0 i.e. integration tests that test the =
'get',
'getTopicList' and 'getTopicChildren' all work properly.=A0=20

But when changing to use ProxyFactoryBean, the 'get' method integration =
test
fails (the interceptor apparently is not called), while 'getTopicList' =
and
'getTopicChildren' work integration test works fine.=A0 The only =
differnence
in how the methods that are tested is that 'get' is defined in an higher
level interface (Service) instead of (TopicService).=A0 The integration =
test
calls topicService.get() ....

I'm hoping that someone can help shine additional light on this =
difference
in behavior with the interceptors, and what I might be doing wrong?

Thanks in advance,

-tim

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D FOLLOW UP EMAIL SENT A DAY AFTER THE =
ORIGINAL =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Following up on the previous email I sent yesterday, I explored one more
scenario.  Since the hiearchy for the 'Service' interface is like this.

Service=20
   -'.get()'

  + TopicService (extends Service)
  - .getTopicList()
  - .getTopicChildren()

And as I've mentioned in my previous email, the Acegi security method
interceptor does not seem to be kicking in on the 'get()' method when =
called
on a TopicService implementation, although it does kick in for the other =
two
methods defined under TopicService when using ProxyFactoryBean and
'interceptorNames' property. =20

So I tested out earlier today what would happen if I defined the 'get()'
method at the TopicService interface level, and updated the security =
method
interceptor from

com.vivakos.vps.service.Service.get=3DTOPIC_AFTER_ACL_READ

to=20

com.vivakos.vps.service.content.Topic.get=3DTOPIC_AFTER_ACL_READ

And the result is that it worked.  So, I'm hoping that someone with a =
better
understanding of what the differences between the ProxyFactoryBean =
advising
process and the TransactionProxyFactoryBean would be - could clarify =
what is
going on, since to me, they should work the same?

Thanks.

-tim