i am trying to get a situation where i can use i18n property files which are backed up with a database?
So for some standard stuff i would like to use the property files, but some fields must be editable by the end-user so i was planning to use i18n in the database for that. So a real combination would be great. If the i18n code cannot be found in the property files then do a lookup in the DB.
Any idea how i can tackle this? I have seen the post Grails i18n From Database but Default Back To File
But there is no real answer to the problem, any other suggestions on how to tackle this?
Put a new domain class into your project:
class Message {
String code
Locale locale
String text
}
Add the following lines to your resources.groovy:
// Place your Spring DSL code here
beans = {
messageSource(DatabaseMessageSource) {
messageBundleMessageSource = ref("messageBundleMessageSource")
}
messageBundleMessageSource(org.codehaus.groovy.grails.context.support.PluginAwareResourceBundleMessageSource) {
basenames = "WEB-INF/grails-app/i18n/messages"
}
}
And add the following class to your src/groovy folder:
class DatabaseMessageSource extends AbstractMessageSource {
def messageBundleMessageSource
protected MessageFormat resolveCode(String code, Locale locale) {
Message msg = messageBundleMessageSource.resolveCode(code, locale)
def format
if(msg) {
format = new MessageFormat(msg.text, msg.locale)
}
else {
format = Message.findByCodeAndLocale(code, locale)
}
return format;
}
}
Now grails will try to resolve the message from the message bundle. If it is not available, it will look it up from database. You could add some error-handling, but this version works, if all messages are available at least in one place.
See http://graemerocher.blogspot.com/2010/04/reading-i18n-messages-from-database.html for some more details.
Some details on the changes done in resources.groovy:
In this file you can define injectable groovy classes, which can be included by just defining a variable having the same name as defined in the resources.groovy. E.g. in this file, there are messageSource and messageBundleMessageSource, which you can be include in any controller or service files. If this variable is defined, an instance of the class in the brackets is created.
In this case, we overwrite the general messageSource to use our custom implementation DatabaseMessageSource. So the I18n function message will now use our custom implementation.
Since our custom implementation requires to check the message.properties-files we keep the original message source in the second bean. By defining this instance in our custom implementation, we can still use the old implementation (and therefore looking up messages the usual way).
I'm not sure I know what you mean by
i18n property files which are backed up with a database
But if you simply mean that you want the message keys to be resolved using a database table (instead of a .properties file), then you can do this by writing your own implementation of the MessageSource interface
class DBMessageSource implements MessageSource {
String getMessage(MessageSourceResolvable resolvable, Locale locale) {
// IMPLEMENT ME
}
String getMessage(String code, Object[] args, Locale locale) {
// IMPLEMENT ME
}
String getMessage(String code, Object[] args, String defaultMessage, Locale locale) {
// IMPLEMENT ME
}
}
Then simply replace the default implementation of the messageSource bean with your implementation by adding the following to resources.groovy
messageSource(DBMessageSource)
In followup of the answer of #crudolf i implemented the following method to achieve my goal.
class DatabaseMessageSource extends AbstractMessageSource {
// the message bundle resource that holds all of the messages
def messageBundleMessageSource
// the default locale used when there is no correct results found
// if a visitor (x) comes along with an unknown locale in the DB
// then this locale will be used as fallback!
Locale fallbackLocale = new Locale("nl", "NL")
protected MessageFormat resolveCode(String code, Locale locale) {
// first try to find the message in the messagebundles
MessageFormat messageFormat = messageBundleMessageSource.resolveCode(code, locale)
if(!messageFormat) {
// no message found so lets find one in the database
def message = Message.findByCodeAndLocale(code, locale) ?: Message.findByCodeAndLocale(code, fallbackLocale)
if (message) {
// found one create a message format!
messageFormat = new MessageFormat(message.text, message.locale)
} else {
// not found! create a standard message format
messageFormat = new MessageFormat(code, locale)
}
}
return messageFormat
}
}
Take a look at https://github.com/goeh/grails-i18n-db and https://github.com/halfbaked/grails-localizations. Both offer also a gui to manage localizations.
Related
I am new to grails and while working with Spring Security LDAP plugin it was identified that it accepts the ldap server password in plain text only. The task in hand is to pass an encrypted password which is decrypted before it is consumed by the plugin during its initialization phase.
I have already searched for all possible blogs and stackoverflow questions but could not find a way to extend the main plugin class to simply override the doWithSpring() method so that i can simply add the required decryption logic for the Ldap server password. Any help here will be appreciated.
I have already seen and tried jasypt plugin but it also does not work well if the password is stored in some external file and not application yml. So I am looking for a solution to extend the Spring security plugin main class, add the required behavior and register the custom class.
EDIT
Adding the snippet from Grails LDAP Security plugin, which I am trying to override. So If i am successfully able to update the value of securityConfig object before the plugin loads, the purpose is solved.
Some snippet from the plugin:
def conf = SpringSecurityUtils.securityConfig
...
...
contextSource(DefaultSpringSecurityContextSource, conf.ldap.context.server) { // 'ldap://localhost:389'
authenticationSource = ref('ldapAuthenticationSource')
authenticationStrategy = ref('authenticationStrategy')
userDn = conf.ldap.context.managerDn // 'cn=admin,dc=example,dc=com'
**password = conf.ldap.context.managerPassword // 'secret'**
contextFactory = contextFactoryClass
dirObjectFactory = dirObjectFactoryClass
baseEnvironmentProperties = conf.ldap.context.baseEnvironmentProperties // none
cacheEnvironmentProperties = conf.ldap.context.cacheEnvironmentProperties // true
anonymousReadOnly = conf.ldap.context.anonymousReadOnly // false
referral = conf.ldap.context.referral // null
}
ldapAuthenticationSource(SimpleAuthenticationSource) {
principal = conf.ldap.context.managerDn // 'cn=admin,dc=example,dc=com'
**credentials = conf.ldap.context.managerPassword // 'secret'**
}
You don't need to override the doWithSpring() method in the existing plugin. You can provide your own plugin which loads after the one you want to affect and have your doWithSpring() add whatever you want to the context. If you add beans with the same name as the ones added by the other plugin, yours will replace the ones provided by the other plugin as long as you configure your plugin to load after the other one. Similarly, you could do the same think in resources.groovy of the app if you don't want to write a plugin for this.
You have other options too. You could write a bean post processor or bean definition post processor that affects the beans created by the other plugin. Depending on the particulars, that might be a better idea.
EDIT:
After seeing your comment below I created a simple example that shows how you might use a definition post processor. See the project at https://github.com/jeffbrown/postprocessordemo.
The interesting bits:
https://github.com/jeffbrown/postprocessordemo/blob/master/src/main/groovy/demo/SomeBean.groovy
package demo
class SomeBean {
String someValue
}
https://github.com/jeffbrown/postprocessordemo/blob/master/src/main/groovy/demo/SomePostProcessor.groovy
package demo
import org.springframework.beans.BeansException
import org.springframework.beans.MutablePropertyValues
import org.springframework.beans.PropertyValue
import org.springframework.beans.factory.config.BeanDefinition
import org.springframework.beans.factory.config.ConfigurableListableBeanFactory
import org.springframework.beans.factory.support.BeanDefinitionRegistry
import org.springframework.beans.factory.support.BeanDefinitionRegistryPostProcessor
class SomePostProcessor implements BeanDefinitionRegistryPostProcessor{
#Override
void postProcessBeanDefinitionRegistry(BeanDefinitionRegistry registry) throws BeansException {
BeanDefinition definition = registry.getBeanDefinition('someBean')
MutablePropertyValues values = definition.getPropertyValues()
PropertyValue value = values.getPropertyValue('someValue')
def originalValue = value.getValue()
// this is where you could do your decrypting...
values.addPropertyValue('someValue', "MODIFIED: ${originalValue}".toString())
}
#Override
void postProcessBeanFactory(ConfigurableListableBeanFactory beanFactory) throws BeansException {
}
}
https://github.com/jeffbrown/postprocessordemo/blob/master/grails-app/conf/spring/resources.groovy
beans = {
someBean(demo.SomeBean) {
someValue = 'Some Value'
}
somePostProcessor demo.SomePostProcessor
}
https://github.com/jeffbrown/postprocessordemo/blob/master/grails-app/init/postprocessordemo/BootStrap.groovy
package postprocessordemo
import demo.SomeBean
class BootStrap {
SomeBean someBean
def init = { servletContext ->
log.info "The Value: ${someBean.someValue}"
}
def destroy = {
}
}
At application startup you will see log output that looks something like this...
2017-10-23 19:04:54.356 INFO --- [ main] postprocessordemo.BootStrap : The Value: MODIFIED: Some Value
The "MODIFIED" there is evidence that the bean definition post processor modified the property value in the bean. In my example I am simply prepending some text to the string. In your implementation you could decrypt a password or do whatever you want to do there.
I hope that helps.
After trying Jasypt plugin and BeanPostProcessor solutions unsuccessfully for my use case, I found below solution to work perfectly.
To describe again the problem statement here,
a) we had to keep the passwords in an encrypted format inside properties files
b) and given we were packaging as a war file so the properties must not be kept inside the war to allow automated deployment scripts update the encrypted passwords depending on the environment
Jasypt plugin was a perfect solution for the use case a), but it was not able to cover the b) scenario
Moreover, the Grails LDAP Security plugin was getting loaded quite early hence Bean Post processors were also not helping out here.
Solution:
Created a new class by implementing the interface SpringApplicationRunListener. Extended its methods and parsed the properties file using YamlPropertySourceLoader
Sample code:
YamlPropertySourceLoader loader = new YamlPropertySourceLoader();
PropertySource<?> applicationYamlPropertySource = loader.load(
"application.yml", new ClassPathResource("application.yml"),"default");
return applicationYamlPropertySource;
Once the properties were loaded inside the MapPropertySource object, parsed them for the encrypted values and applied the decryption logic.
This whole implementation was executed before any plugins were initialized during Grails bootup process solving the purpose.
Hope it will help others.
I'm not a programming savvy person, so please bear with me.
I've read blog entries and docs about command object. I've never used it and was wondering if I should. (I probably should...)
My project requires parsing, sorting, calculating, and saving results into database when users upload files.
So according to one of the blog entries I read and its corresponding github code,
1) SERVICE should receive file uploads, parse uploaded files (mainly docs and pdfs), sort parsed data using RegEx, and calculate data,
2) COMMAND OBJECT should call SERVICE, collect results and send results back to controller, and save results into the database,
3) CONTROLLER should receive request from VIEW, get results from COMMAND OBJECT, and send results back to VIEW.
Did I understand correctly?
Thanks.
I found this to be the best setup. Here is an example that I use on production:
Command Object (to carry data and ensure their validity):
#grails.validation.Validateable
class SearchCommand implements Serializable {
// search query
String s
// page
Integer page
static constraints = {
s nullable: true
page nullable: true
}
}
Controller (directs a request to a Service and then gets a response back from the Service and directs this response to a view):
class SomeController {
//inject service
def someService
def search(SearchCommand cmd) {
def result = someService.search(cmd)
// can access result in .gsp as ${result} or in other forms
render(view: "someView", model: [result: result])
}
}
Service (handles business logic and grabs data from Domain(s)):
class SomeService {
def search(SearchCommand cmd) {
if(cmd.hasErrors()) {
// errors found in cmd.errors
return
}
// do some logic for example calc offset from cmd.page
def result = Stuff.searchAll(cmd.s, offset, max)
return result
}
}
Domain (all database queries are handled here):
class Stuff {
String name
static constraints = {
name nullable: false, blank: false, size: 1..30
}
static searchAll(String searchQuery, int offset, int max) {
return Stuff.executeQuery("select s.name from Stuff s where s.name = :searchQuery ", [searchQuery: searchQuery, offset: offset, max:max])
}
}
Yes, you understood it correctly except the one thing: command object shouldn't save the data to DB - let service to do that. The other advantage of command object is data binding and validation of data from the client. Read more about command objects here grails command object docs
You can also find helpful information regarding your question in this article
grails best practices
I guess not. Its not really related to whether the save is done in a service it should always attempt to carry out complex stuff and specifically db stuff in a service. so that is regardless. I tend to not use command object but have got hooked on helper classes aka beans that sit in src/main/groovy and do all of the validation and formatting. I just did a form and in it has feedback and reason.
Initially I thought I would get away with
def someAction(String feedback, String reason) {
someService.doSomething(feedback,reason)
}
But then I looked closed and my form was firstly a textarea then the selection objects were bytes so above was not working and to simply fix it without adding the complexity to my controller/service I did this:
packe some.package
import grails.validation.Validateable
class SomeBean implements Validateable {
User user
byte reason
String feedback
static constraints = {
user(nullable: true)
reason(nullable:true, inList:UsersRemoved.REASONS)
feedback(nullable:true)
}
void setReason(String t) {
reason=t as byte
}
void setFeedback(String t) {
feedback=t?.trim()
}
}
Now my controller
class SomeController {
def userService
def someService
def doSomething(SomeBean bean){
bean.user = userService.currentUser
if (!bean.validate()) {
flash.message=bean.errors.allErrors.collect{g.message([error : it])}
render view: '/someTemplate', model: [instance: bean,template:'/some/template']
return
}
someService.doSomeThing(bean)
}
}
Now my service
Class SomeService {
def doSomeThing(SomeBean bean) {
if (bean.user=='A') {
.....
}
}
All of that validation would have still had to have been done somewhere, you say no validation but in a good model you should do validation and set things to be stored in proper structures to reduce overloading your db over time. difficult to explain but in short i am talking about your domain class objects and ensuring you are not setting up String something string somethingelse and then not even defining their lenghts etc. be strict and validate
if you have a text area this will be stored in the back end - so you will need to trim it like above - you will need to ensure the input does not exceed the max character of the actual db structure which if not defined will probably be 255
and by doing
static constraints = {
user(nullable: true)
reason(min:1, max:255, nullable:true, inList:UsersRemoved.REASONS)
Has already invalidated it through the bean.validate() in the controller if the user exceeded somehow my front end checks and put in more than 255.
This stuff takes time be patient
Edited to finally add in that example byte - is one to be careful of -
When adding any String or what ever I have started to define the specific like this and in the case of byte if it is a boolean true false - fine if not then define it as a tinyint
static mapping = {
//since there is more than 1 type in this case
reason(sqlType:'tinyint(1)')
feedback(sqlType:'varchar(1000)')
// name(sqlType:'varchar(70)')
}
If you then look at your tables created in the db you should find they have been created as per definition rather than standard 255 varchar which I think is the default for a declared String.
I have a file under src/groovy and I have some properties that are in my Config.groovy and in external property file too. Normally if one want access properties its possible to use grailsApplication .configuration.property.name expression. I want to be able to access all those properties from this file that is under src/groovy directory. What I've tried so far
import grails.util.Holders
class ForkedTomcatCustomizer {
def application
void customize(Tomcat tomcat) {
println Holders.grailsApplication.config.property.name
}
}
gave me NPE saying that grailsAppliction is null
import org.codehaus.groovy.grails.web.context.ServletContextHolder as SCH
import org.codehaus.groovy.grails.web.servlet.GrailsApplicationAttributes as GA
class ForkedTomcatCustomizer {
def application
void customize(Tomcat tomcat) {
def ctx = SCH.servletContext.getAttribute(GA.APPLICATION_CONTEXT)
def grailsAppliction = ctx.grailsApplication.getObject()
println grailsAppliction.config.property.name
}
}
the same - NPE because grailsAppliction is null
Is it possible to handle this situation somehow? Thank you!
Use the below and see if it works
println Holders.config.property.name
You don't need grailsApplication when using Holders.
The examples below are probably a little more complex than what you need, but they show how to get a configuration property at build time. I use them to merge two configuration files, but you might not need to do that.
This method returns a config property when called here at the CompileEnd event.
You could define a similar method in your app's _Events.groovy file that calls your own configuration holder class.
import org.codehaus.groovy.grails.commons.ConfigurationHolder;
class KeyAndSecret{
public static String consumerKey = ConfigurationHolder.config.consumerKey;
public static String consumerSecret = ConfigurationHolder.config.consumerSecret;
}
Try like this
I want to make my Grails application support only one language, that I can define somewhere, completely ignoring the client's headers or the "lang" parameter. Is there any way I can do so? Thanks.
Define a LocaleResolver bean in your config/spring/resources.groovy to set the default locale.
beans = {
localeResolver(org.springframework.web.servlet.i18n.SessionLocaleResolver) {
defaultLocale = new Locale("de","DE")
java.util.Locale.setDefault(defaultLocale)
}
}
This is useful if you don't have to deal with the lang parameter - otherwise it would get overridden. To even ignore the lang parameter value you can set the locale in a Filter upon each request:
import org.springframework.web.servlet.support.RequestContextUtils as RCU
...
def filters = {
all(controller:'*', action:'*') {
before = {
def locale = new Locale("sv","SV")
RCU.getLocaleResolver(request).setLocale(request, response, locale)
}
}
}
This approach seems a bit repetitive as Locale is re-set on every request. It would be more elegant to disable the browsers locale detection via an config option.
The default LocaleResolver of Grails is SessionLocaleResolver. If you want to always use de_DE you can change this to FixedLocaleResolver.
beans {
localeResolver(FixedLocaleResolver) {
locale = new Locale("de", "DE")
}
}
If you want to restrict to a set of locales, then you will need a filter, and use the SessionLocaleResolver#setLocale(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response, Locale locale) method.
remove all messages_xx.properties files and keep only the messages.properties files.
This is the default message bundle to which the system will always fall back if it can't find the right message bundle.
This way you can still use messages (and thus keep the option to nationalize your app) but users will get always the same language.
This worked for me in order to override the default localResolver bean
beans = {
localeResolver(org.springframework.web.servlet.i18n.FixedLocaleResolver) {
setLocale(Locale.US)
}
}
we currently use configuration files to store application settings. I was wondering if it is possible to store these settings inside the database and if so how to achieve this?
Greetings
You can store whatever you want in the database and read it out using a Domain class. This is especially useful if you want to be able to make changes to things without having to redeploy new code. But realize that you will incur a database hit every time the property is accessed.
You can set up a ConfigurationService with:
ConfigurationService {
static def configurationValues
def getConfigurationValues() {
if(configurationValues == null) {
refreshConfigurationValues()
}
configurationValues
}
def refreshConfigurationValues() {
configurationValues = //go get the values out of the database
}
}
Then you can add a Controller/Action to force the refresh when necessary
ConfigurationController {
def configurationService
def refreshConfiguration = {
configurationService.refreshConfigurationValues()
render "Ahhh... That's refreshing :)"
}
}
Now you can refresh your config values by invoking: "http://yoururl/appName/configuration/refreshConfiguration"
This is can be done with BootStrap.groovy. So following Jarred's answer, create a domain class of the configuration data you would like to store and then inside the BootStrap.groovy file, put these values. What this does is if the configuration values does not exists, it will create it, if it exists will not do anything.
Then you can access your configuration values using the domain class. I'm assuming you want to do this because grailsApplication.config... can sometimes become unruly.
Domain-Class MyConfig.groovy:
class MyConfig {
String type
String name
String value
}
BootStrap.groovy:
def myConfig = MyConfig.findByName("path") ?: new MyConfig(
type: "Path"
name: "path"
value: "/var/tmp"
).save(failOnError: true)