SeamFramework.orgCommunity Documentation
Interceptor functionality is defined in the Java Interceptors specification. CDI enhances this functionality with a more sophisticated, semantic, annotation-based approach to binding interceptors to beans.
The Interceptors specification defines two kinds of interception points:
business method interception, and
lifecycle callback interception.
In addition, the EJB specification defines timeout method interception.
A business method interceptor applies to invocations of methods of the bean by clients of the bean:
public class TransactionInterceptor {
@AroundInvoke
public Object manageTransaction(InvocationContext ctx) throws Exception { ... }
}
A lifecycle callback interceptor applies to invocations of lifecycle callbacks by the container:
public class DependencyInjectionInterceptor {
@PostConstruct
public void injectDependencies(InvocationContext ctx) { ... }
}
An interceptor class may intercept both lifecycle callbacks and business methods.
A timeout method interceptor applies to invocations of EJB timeout methods by the container:
public class TimeoutInterceptor {
@AroundTimeout
public Object manageTransaction(InvocationContext ctx) throws Exception { ... }
}
Suppose we want to declare that some of our beans are transactional. The first thing we need is an interceptor binding type to specify exactly which beans we're interested in:
@InterceptorBinding
@Target({METHOD, TYPE})
@Retention(RUNTIME)
public @interface Transactional {}
Now we can easily specify that our ShoppingCart is a transactional object:
@Transactional
public class ShoppingCart { ... }
Or, if we prefer, we can specify that just one method is transactional:
public class ShoppingCart {
@Transactional public void checkout() { ... }
}
That's great, but somewhere along the line we're going to have to actually implement the interceptor that
provides this transaction management aspect. All we need to do is create a standard interceptor, and annotate
it @Interceptor and @Transactional.
@Transactional @Interceptor
public class TransactionInterceptor {
@AroundInvoke
public Object manageTransaction(InvocationContext ctx) throws Exception { ... }
}
Interceptors can take advantage of dependency injection:
@Transactional @Interceptor
public class TransactionInterceptor {
@Resource UserTransaction transaction;
@AroundInvoke
public Object manageTransaction(InvocationContext ctx) throws Exception { ... }
}
Multiple interceptors may use the same interceptor binding type.
By default, all interceptors are disabled. We need to enable our interceptor in the
beans.xml descriptor of a bean archive. This activation only applies to the beans in
that archive.
<beans
xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="
http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee
http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee/beans_1_0.xsd">
<interceptors>
<class>org.mycompany.myapp.TransactionInterceptor</class>
</interceptors>
</beans>
Whoah! Why the angle bracket stew?
Well, having the XML declaration is actually a good thing. It solves two problems:
it enables us to specify a total ordering for all the interceptors in our system, ensuring deterministic behavior, and
it lets us enable or disable interceptor classes at deployment time.
For example, we could specify that our security interceptor runs before our transaction interceptor.
<beans
xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="
http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee
http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee/beans_1_0.xsd">
<interceptors>
<class>org.mycompany.myapp.SecurityInterceptor</class>
<class>org.mycompany.myapp.TransactionInterceptor</class>
</interceptors>
</beans>
Or we could turn them both off in our test environment by simply not mentioning them in
beans.xml! Ah, so simple.
Suppose we want to add some extra information to our @Transactional annotation:
@InterceptorBinding
@Target({METHOD, TYPE})
@Retention(RUNTIME)
public @interface Transactional {
boolean requiresNew() default false;
}
CDI will use the value of requiresNew to choose between two different interceptors,
TransactionInterceptor and RequiresNewTransactionInterceptor.
@Transactional(requiresNew = true) @Interceptor
public class RequiresNewTransactionInterceptor {
@AroundInvoke
public Object manageTransaction(InvocationContext ctx) throws Exception { ... }
}
Now we can use RequiresNewTransactionInterceptor like this:
@Transactional(requiresNew = true)
public class ShoppingCart { ... }
But what if we only have one interceptor and we want the container to ignore the value of
requiresNew when binding interceptors? Perhaps this information is only useful for the
interceptor implementation. We can use the @Nonbinding annotation:
@InterceptorBinding
@Target({METHOD, TYPE})
@Retention(RUNTIME)
public @interface Secure {
@Nonbinding String[] rolesAllowed() default {};
}
Usually we use combinations of interceptor bindings types to bind multiple interceptors to a bean. For example,
the following declaration would be used to bind TransactionInterceptor and
SecurityInterceptor to the same bean:
@Secure(rolesAllowed="admin") @Transactional
public class ShoppingCart { ... }
However, in very complex cases, an interceptor itself may specify some combination of interceptor binding types:
@Transactional @Secure @Interceptor
public class TransactionalSecureInterceptor { ... }
Then this interceptor could be bound to the checkout() method using any one of the following
combinations:
public class ShoppingCart {
@Transactional @Secure public void checkout() { ... }
}
@Secure
public class ShoppingCart {
@Transactional public void checkout() { ... }
}
@Transactional
public class ShoppingCart {
@Secure public void checkout() { ... }
}
@Transactional @Secure
public class ShoppingCart {
public void checkout() { ... }
}
One limitation of the Java language support for annotations is the lack of annotation inheritance. Really, annotations should have reuse built in, to allow this kind of thing to work:
public @interface Action extends Transactional, Secure { ... }
Well, fortunately, CDI works around this missing feature of Java. We may annotate one interceptor binding type with other interceptor binding types (termed a meta-annotation). The interceptor bindings are transitive — any bean with the first interceptor binding inherits the interceptor bindings declared as meta-annotations.
@Transactional @Secure
@InterceptorBinding
@Target(TYPE)
@Retention(RUNTIME)
public @interface Action { ... }
Now, any bean annotated @Action will be bound to both
TransactionInterceptor and SecurityInterceptor. (And even
TransactionalSecureInterceptor, if it exists.)
The @Interceptors annotation defined by the interceptor specification (and used by the
managed bean and EJB specifications) is still supported in CDI.
@Interceptors({TransactionInterceptor.class, SecurityInterceptor.class})
public class ShoppingCart {
public void checkout() { ... }
}
However, this approach suffers the following drawbacks:
the interceptor implementation is hardcoded in business code,
interceptors may not be easily disabled at deployment time, and
the interceptor ordering is non-global — it is determined by the order in which interceptors are listed at the class level.
Therefore, we recommend the use of CDI-style interceptor bindings.