SeamFramework.orgCommunity Documentation

Chapter 4. The contextual component model

4.1. Seam contexts
4.1.1. Stateless context
4.1.2. Event context
4.1.3. Page context
4.1.4. Conversation context
4.1.5. Session context
4.1.6. Business process context
4.1.7. Application context
4.1.8. Context variables
4.1.9. Context search priority
4.1.10. Concurrency model
4.2. Seam components
4.2.1. Stateless session beans
4.2.2. Stateful session beans
4.2.3. Entity beans
4.2.4. JavaBeans
4.2.5. Message-driven beans
4.2.6. Interception
4.2.7. Component names
4.2.8. Defining the component scope
4.2.9. Components with multiple roles
4.2.10. Built-in components
4.3. Bijection
4.4. Lifecycle methods
4.5. Conditional installation
4.6. Logging
4.7. The Mutable interface and @ReadOnly
4.8. Factory and manager components

The two core concepts in Seam are the notion of a context and the notion of a component. Components are stateful objects, usually EJBs, and an instance of a component is associated with a context, and given a name in that context. Bijection provides a mechanism for aliasing internal component names (instance variables) to contextual names, allowing component trees to be dynamically assembled, and reassembled by Seam.

Let's start by describing the contexts built in to Seam.

Seam contexts are created and destroyed by the framework. The application does not control context demarcation via explicit Java API calls. Context are usually implicit. In some cases, however, contexts are demarcated via annotations.

The basic Seam contexts are:

You will recognize some of these contexts from servlet and related specifications. However, two of them might be new to you: conversation context, and business process context. One reason state management in web applications is so fragile and error-prone is that the three built-in contexts (request, session and application) are not especially meaningful from the point of view of the business logic. A user login session, for example, is a fairly arbitrary construct in terms of the actual application work flow. Therefore, most Seam components are scoped to the conversation or business process contexts, since they are the contexts which are most meaningful in terms of the application.

Let's look at each context in turn.

The conversation context is a truly central concept in Seam. A conversation is a unit of work from the point of view of the user. It might span several interactions with the user, several requests, and several database transactions. But to the user, a conversation solves a single problem. For example, "book hotel", "approve contract", "create order" are all conversations. You might like to think of a conversation implementing a single "use case" or "user story", but the relationship is not necessarily quite exact.

A conversation holds state associated with "what the user is doing now, in this window". A single user may have multiple conversations in progress at any point in time, usually in multiple windows. The conversation context allows us to ensure that state from the different conversations does not collide and cause bugs.

It might take you some time to get used to thinking of applications in terms of conversations. But once you get used to it, we think you'll love the notion, and never be able to not think in terms of conversations again!

Some conversations last for just a single request. Conversations that span multiple requests must be demarcated using annotations provided by Seam.

Some conversations are also tasks. A task is a conversation that is significant in terms of a long-running business process, and has the potential to trigger a business process state transition when it is successfully completed. Seam provides a special set of annotations for task demarcation.

Conversations may be nested, with one conversation taking place "inside" a wider conversation. This is an advanced feature.

Usually, conversation state is actually held by Seam in the servlet session between requests. Seam implements configurable conversation timeout, automatically destroying inactive conversations, and thus ensuring that the state held by a single user login session does not grow without bound if the user abandons conversations.

Seam serializes processing of concurrent requests that take place in the same long-running conversation context, in the same process.

Alternatively, Seam may be configured to keep conversational state in the client browser.

Neither the servlet nor EJB specifications define any facilities for managing concurrent requests originating from the same client. The servlet container simply lets all threads run concurrently and leaves enforcing threadsafeness to application code. The EJB container allows stateless components to be accessed concurrently, and throws an exception if multiple threads access a stateful session bean.

This behavior might have been okay in old-style web applications which were based around fine-grained, synchronous requests. But for modern applications which make heavy use of many fine-grained, asynchronous (AJAX) requests, concurrency is a fact of life, and must be supported by the programming model. Seam weaves a concurrency management layer into its context model.

The Seam session and application contexts are multithreaded. Seam will allow concurrent requests in a context to be processed concurrently. The event and page contexts are by nature single threaded. The business process context is strictly speaking multi-threaded, but in practice concurrency is sufficiently rare that this fact may be disregarded most of the time. Finally, Seam enforces a single thread per conversation per process model for the conversation context by serializing concurrent requests in the same long-running conversation context.

Since the session context is multithreaded, and often contains volatile state, session scope components are always protected by Seam from concurrent access so long as the Seam interceptors are not disabled for that component. If interceptors are disabled, then any thread-safety that is required must be implemented by the component itself. Seam serializes requests to session scope session beans and JavaBeans by default (and detects and breaks any deadlocks that occur). This is not the default behaviour for application scoped components however, since application scoped components do not usually hold volatile state and because synchronization at the global level is extremely expensive. However, you can force a serialized threading model on any session bean or JavaBean component by adding the @Synchronized annotation.

This concurrency model means that AJAX clients can safely use volatile session and conversational state, without the need for any special work on the part of the developer.

Seam components are POJOs (Plain Old Java Objects). In particular, they are JavaBeans or EJB 3.0 enterprise beans. While Seam does not require that components be EJBs and can even be used without an EJB 3.0 compliant container, Seam was designed with EJB 3.0 in mind and includes deep integration with EJB 3.0. Seam supports the following component types.

All seam components need a name. We can assign a name to a component using the @Name annotation:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    ... 
}

This name is the seam component name and is not related to any other name defined by the EJB specification. However, seam component names work just like JSF managed bean names and you can think of the two concepts as identical.

@Name is not the only way to define a component name, but we always need to specify the name somewhere. If we don't, then none of the other Seam annotations will function.

Whenever Seam instantiates a component, it binds the new instance to a variable in the scope configured for the component that matches the component name. This behavior is identical to how JSF managed beans work, except that Seam allows you to configure this mapping using annotations rather than XML. You can also programmatically bind a component to a context variable. This is useful if a particular component serves more than one role in the system. For example, the currently logged in User might be bound to the currentUser session context variable, while a User that is the subject of some administration functionality might be bound to the user conversation context variable. Be careful, though, because through a programmatic assignment, it's possible to overwrite a context variable that has a reference to a Seam component, potentially confusing matters.

For very large applications, and for built-in seam components, qualified component names are often used to avoid naming conflicts.

@Name("com.jboss.myapp.loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    ... 
}

We may use the qualified component name both in Java code and in JSF's expression language:


<h:commandButton type="submit" value="Login"
                 action="#{com.jboss.myapp.loginAction.login}"/>

Since this is noisy, Seam also provides a means of aliasing a qualified name to a simple name. Add a line like this to the components.xml file:


<factory name="loginAction" scope="STATELESS" value="#{com.jboss.myapp.loginAction}"/>

All of the built-in Seam components have qualified names but can be accessed through their unqualified names due to the namespace import feature of Seam. The components.xml file included in the Seam JAR defines the following namespaces.

<components xmlns="http://jboss.com/products/seam/components">
    
    <import>org.jboss.seam.core</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.cache</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.transaction</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.framework</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.web</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.faces</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.international</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.theme</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.pageflow</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.bpm</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.jms</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.mail</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.security</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.security.management</import>  
    <import>org.jboss.seam.security.permission</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.captcha</import>
    <import>org.jboss.seam.excel.exporter</import>
    <!-- ... --->
</components>

When attempting to resolve an unqualified name, Seam will check each of those namespaces, in order. You can include additional namespaces in your application's components.xml file for application-specific namespaces.

Dependency injection or inversion of control is by now a familiar concept to most Java developers. Dependency injection allows a component to obtain a reference to another component by having the container "inject" the other component to a setter method or instance variable. In all dependency injection implementations that we have seen, injection occurs when the component is constructed, and the reference does not subsequently change for the lifetime of the component instance. For stateless components, this is reasonable. From the point of view of a client, all instances of a particular stateless component are interchangeable. On the other hand, Seam emphasizes the use of stateful components. So traditional dependency injection is no longer a very useful construct. Seam introduces the notion of bijection as a generalization of injection. In contrast to injection, bijection is:

In essence, bijection lets you alias a context variable to a component instance variable, by specifying that the value of the instance variable is injected, outjected, or both. Of course, we use annotations to enable bijection.

The @In annotation specifies that a value should be injected, either into an instance variable:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    @In User user;
    ... 
}

or into a setter method:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    User user;
    
    @In
    public void setUser(User user) {
        this.user=user;
    }
    
    ... 
}

By default, Seam will do a priority search of all contexts, using the name of the property or instance variable that is being injected. You may wish to specify the context variable name explicitly, using, for example, @In("currentUser").

If you want Seam to create an instance of the component when there is no existing component instance bound to the named context variable, you should specify @In(create=true). If the value is optional (it can be null), specify @In(required=false).

For some components, it can be repetitive to have to specify @In(create=true) everywhere they are used. In such cases, you can annotate the component @AutoCreate, and then it will always be created, whenever needed, even without the explicit use of create=true.

You can even inject the value of an expression:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    @In("#{user.username}") String username;
    ... 
}

Injected values are disinjected (i.e., set to null) immediately after method completion and outjection.

(There is much more information about component lifecycle and injection in the next chapter.)

The @Out annotation specifies that an attribute should be outjected, either from an instance variable:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    @Out User user;
    ... 
}

or from a getter method:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    User user;
    
    @Out
    public User getUser() {
        return user;
    }
    
    ... 
}

An attribute may be both injected and outjected:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    @In @Out User user;
    ... 
}

or:

@Name("loginAction")

@Stateless
public class LoginAction implements Login { 
    User user;
    
    @In
    public void setUser(User user) {
        this.user=user;
    }
    
    @Out
    public User getUser() {
        return user;
    }
    
    ... 
}

Session bean and entity bean Seam components support all the usual EJB 3.0 lifecycle callback (@PostConstruct, @PreDestroy, etc). But Seam also supports the use of any of these callbacks with JavaBean components. However, since these annotations are not available in a J2EE environment, Seam defines two additional component lifecycle callbacks, equivalent to @PostConstruct and @PreDestroy.

The @Create method is called after Seam instantiates a component. Components may define only one @Create method.

The @Destroy method is called when the context that the Seam component is bound to ends. Components may define only one @Destroy method.

In addition, stateful session bean components must define a method with no parameters annotated @Remove. This method is called by Seam when the context ends.

Finally, a related annotation is the @Startup annotation, which may be applied to any application or session scoped component. The @Startup annotation tells Seam to instantiate the component immediately, when the context begins, instead of waiting until it is first referenced by a client. It is possible to control the order of instantiation of startup components by specifying @Startup(depends={....}).

The @Install annotation lets you control conditional installation of components that are required in some deployment scenarios and not in others. This is useful if:

@Install works by letting you specify precedence and dependencies.

The precedence of a component is a number that Seam uses to decide which component to install when there are multiple classes with the same component name in the classpath. Seam will choose the component with the higher precendence. There are some predefined precedence values (in ascending order):

Suppose we have a component named messageSender that talks to a JMS queue.

@Name("messageSender") 

public class MessageSender {
    public void sendMessage() {
        //do something with JMS
    }
}

In our unit tests, we don't have a JMS queue available, so we would like to stub out this method. We'll create a mock component that exists in the classpath when unit tests are running, but is never deployed with the application:

@Name("messageSender") 

@Install(precedence=MOCK)
public class MockMessageSender extends MessageSender {
    public void sendMessage() {
        //do nothing!
    }
}

The precedence helps Seam decide which version to use when it finds both components in the classpath.

This is nice if we are able to control exactly which classes are in the classpath. But if I'm writing a reusable framework with many dependecies, I don't want to have to break that framework across many jars. I want to be able to decide which components to install depending upon what other components are installed, and upon what classes are available in the classpath. The @Install annotation also controls this functionality. Seam uses this mechanism internally to enable conditional installation of many of the built-in components. However, you probably won't need to use it in your application.

Who is not totally fed up with seeing noisy code like this?

private static final Log log = LogFactory.getLog(CreateOrderAction.class);

        
public Order createOrder(User user, Product product, int quantity) {
    if ( log.isDebugEnabled() ) {
        log.debug("Creating new order for user: " + user.username() + 
            " product: " + product.name() 
            + " quantity: " + quantity);
    }
    return new Order(user, product, quantity);
}

It is difficult to imagine how the code for a simple log message could possibly be more verbose. There is more lines of code tied up in logging than in the actual business logic! I remain totally astonished that the Java community has not come up with anything better in 10 years.

Seam provides a logging API that simplifies this code significantly:

@Logger private Log log;

        
public Order createOrder(User user, Product product, int quantity) {
    log.debug("Creating new order for user: #0 product: #1 quantity: #2", user.username(), product.name(), quantity);
    return new Order(user, product, quantity);
}

It doesn't matter if you declare the log variable static or not — it will work either way, except for entity bean components which require the log variable to be static.

Note that we don't need the noisy if ( log.isDebugEnabled() ) guard, since string concatenation happens inside the debug() method. Note also that we don't usually need to specify the log category explicitly, since Seam knows what component it is injecting the Log into.

If User and Product are Seam components available in the current contexts, it gets even better:

@Logger private Log log;

        
public Order createOrder(User user, Product product, int quantity) {
    log.debug("Creating new order for user: #{user.username} product: #{product.name} quantity: #0", quantity);
    return new Order(user, product, quantity);
}

Seam logging automagically chooses whether to send output to log4j or JDK logging. If log4j is in the classpath, Seam with use it. If it is not, Seam will use JDK logging.

Many application servers feature an amazingly broken implementation of HttpSession clustering, where changes to the state of mutable objects bound to the session are only replicated when the application calls setAttribute() explicitly. This is a source of bugs that can not effectively be tested for at development time, since they will only manifest when failover occurs. Furthermore, the actual replication message contains the entire serialized object graph bound to the session attribute, which is inefficient.

Of course, EJB stateful session beans must perform automatic dirty checking and replication of mutable state and a sophisticated EJB container can introduce optimizations such as attribute-level replication. Unfortunately, not all Seam users have the good fortune to be working in an environment that supports EJB 3.0. So, for session and conversation scoped JavaBean and entity bean components, Seam provides an extra layer of cluster-safe state management over the top of the web container session clustering.

For session or conversation scoped JavaBean components, Seam automatically forces replication to occur by calling setAttribute() once in every request that the component was invoked by the application. Of course, this strategy is inefficient for read-mostly components. You can control this behavior by implementing the org.jboss.seam.core.Mutable interface, or by extending org.jboss.seam.core.AbstractMutable, and writing your own dirty-checking logic inside the component. For example,

@Name("account")

public class Account extends AbstractMutable
{
    private BigDecimal balance;
    
    public void setBalance(BigDecimal balance)
    {
        setDirty(this.balance, balance);
        this.balance = balance;
    }
    
    public BigDecimal getBalance()
    {
        return balance;
    }
    
    ...
    
}

Or, you can use the @ReadOnly annotation to achieve a similar effect:

@Name("account")

public class Account
{
    private BigDecimal balance;
    
    public void setBalance(BigDecimal balance)
    {
        this.balance = balance;
    }
    
    @ReadOnly
    public BigDecimal getBalance()
    {
        return balance;
    }
    
    ...
    
}

For session or conversation scoped entity bean components, Seam automatically forces replication to occur by calling setAttribute() once in every request, unless the (conversation-scoped) entity is currently associated with a Seam-managed persistence context, in which case no replication is needed. This strategy is not necessarily efficient, so session or conversation scope entity beans should be used with care. You can always write a stateful session bean or JavaBean component to "manage" the entity bean instance. For example,

@Stateful

@Name("account")
public class AccountManager extends AbstractMutable
{
    private Account account; // an entity bean
    
    @Unwrap
    public Account getAccount()
    {
        return account;
    }
    
    ...
    
}

Note that the EntityHome class in the Seam Application Framework provides a great example of managing an entity bean instance using a Seam component.

We often need to work with objects that are not Seam components. But we still want to be able to inject them into our components using @In and use them in value and method binding expressions, etc. Sometimes, we even need to tie them into the Seam context lifecycle (@Destroy, for example). So the Seam contexts can contain objects which are not Seam components, and Seam provides a couple of nice features that make it easier to work with non-component objects bound to contexts.

The factory component pattern lets a Seam component act as the instantiator for a non-component object. A factory method will be called when a context variable is referenced but has no value bound to it. We define factory methods using the @Factory annotation. The factory method binds a value to the context variable, and determines the scope of the bound value. There are two styles of factory method. The first style returns a value, which is bound to the context by Seam:

@Factory(scope=CONVERSATION)

public List<Customer> getCustomerList() { 
    return ... ;
} 

The second style is a method of type void which binds the value to the context variable itself:

@DataModel List<Customer> customerList;


@Factory("customerList")
public void initCustomerList() { 
    customerList = ...  ;
} 

In both cases, the factory method is called when we reference the customerList context variable and its value is null, and then has no further part to play in the lifecycle of the value. An even more powerful pattern is the manager component pattern. In this case, we have a Seam component that is bound to a context variable, that manages the value of the context variable, while remaining invisible to clients.

A manager component is any component with an @Unwrap method. This method returns the value that will be visable to clients, and is called every time a context variable is referenced.

@Name("customerList")

@Scope(CONVERSATION)
public class CustomerListManager
{
    ...
    
    @Unwrap
    public List<Customer> getCustomerList() { 
        return ... ;
    }
}

The manager component pattern is especially useful if we have an object where you need more control over the lifecycle of the component. For example, if you have a heavyweight object that needs a cleanup operation when the context ends you could @Unwrap the object, and perform cleanup in the @Destroy method of the manager component.

@Name("hens")

@Scope(APPLICATION) 
public class HenHouse
{
    Set<Hen> hens;
    
    @In(required=false) Hen hen;
    
    @Unwrap
    public List<Hen> getHens()
    {
        if (hens == null)
        {
            // Setup our hens
        }
        return hens;
    }
    
    @Observer({"chickBorn", "chickenBoughtAtMarket"})
    public addHen()
    {
        hens.add(hen);
    }
    
    @Observer("chickenSoldAtMarket")
    public removeHen()
    {
        hens.remove(hen);
    }
    
    @Observer("foxGetsIn")
    public removeAllHens()
    {
        hens.clear();
    }
    ...
} 

Here the managed component observes many events which change the underlying object. The component manages these actions itself, and because the object is unwrapped on every access, a consistent view is provided.