Hi all, I'm finding several issues around this subject. While I tried several workarounds, I'd like us to agree on a strategy to address the root problem which is that Hibernate ORM might not necessarily want to use the Javassist version provided by WildFly, yet this is currently being forced on us.

#Manifestation The problem manifests itself as a ClassCastException on casting the enhanced entity to a Javassist Proxy: it has been enhanced by a different Javassist instance than the one being used by ORM during runtime. #Need more tests First of, let me clarify that these issues are highlighted only the Hibernate Search testsuite, as we're trying to use these modules. Apparently the two tests we have in ORM to cover for the modules were not enough to highlight this problem.. we'll need to expand them. #The problem: duplicate dependency The WildFly modules include the Javassist version which ORM is using during the build, but also depends on the one provided by WildFly: - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/blob/master/hibernate-orm-modu... [There seems to be a comment about this but I guess we forgot to actually comment out the next line] #Which one? So I tried to comment out the reference to the WildFly module, but that gets me in more trouble as the JipiJapa integration will (my guess) use the "WildFly edition" of Javassist. Doing the opposite actually seems to work fine, but I guess there are reasons for ORM to have upgraded Javassist? #Failed workarounds I tried to disable class enhancement by setting either (and both!) of: - jboss.as.jpa.classtransformer = false - hibernate.ejb.use_class_enhancer = false I found these on the WildFly JPA Wiki [1], but it looks like they are not effective?

#Viable workaround Removing the new Javassist version from the ORM module fixed my problems, but I'm not comfortable with this unless someone could confirm the version upgrade can wait, at least for the purpose of what we package in these modules? #Better fix I suspect the better solution would be for ORM to fully re-package the JipiJapa integration, so that we're able to be in control of version upgrade needs without having to wait for WildFly release cycles and other planets to align. #Wishlist: Modules refactoring Another reason for which I'd like ORM to "own" these modules, is that we could evolve them better. For example: - it seems the JipiJapa integration is having loads of dependencies which I suspect it doesn't really need.

- we should hide Javassist & Byte Buddy from being exposed to the application

- make Byte Buddy an option: I guess improve the JipiJapa itegration to support it and move it into its own private module.

## Suggestions? I'm stuck again on Hibernate Search upgrading to latest ORM so I'll see to apply the workaround without waiting for the proper solution. Not sure which actions I should take on ORM? Personally I think I'd just patch the modules to use the older Javassist when running on WildFly; that upgrade should wait for either WildFly to upgrade, or use to rethink these modules. Scott, could you help me by verifying if and were I should open a JIRA for those properties being ignored?

Thanks, Sanne 1 - https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/WFLY10/JPA+Reference+Guide#JPARefer... _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Didn't we want to migrate off of Javassist for ORM 6, going for ByteBuddy exclusively? https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-11253 discusses that.

> > We talked about this not long ago and possible solutions, the only > agreed on solution was to eliminate the ORM requirement for Javassist > classes to be on the application classpath, by switching to ByteBuddy. Like I replied to Gunnar, that's a different problem. Sorry all for the confusion! In this case it's Hibernate ORM which is being fed two different versions of Javassist simultaneously; clearly that's our fault. The application classpath is not affected. > Could you could use one of the previously suggested solutions in your > testing? For example, your application could use a shaded Javassist > jar, that doesn't interfere with the ORM Javassist. I'm not trying to use Javassist. If only the flags to disable it would work I'd be happy to disable it ;-)

> > Why don't you contribute code changes instead to WildFly? I did > create a pull request for https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5773 > that is still pending, to remove some unneeded dependencies. This > won't get merged without an EAP jira that goes with it, which I don't > plan to create, since there is no EAP need for the change. Pull > request is https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/9305. Thanks! Sure I'd be happy to contribute these to WildFly, but knowing which dependency is needed - or MIGHT be needed in certain configurations - requires in depth knowledge of the module one wants to cleanup.

I just have the *impression* that some of these dependencies are no longer needed, but going back and forth between projects at different releases - and supposed to support various other versions - doesn't make it easy.

So I suspect that if the adaptor code itself was bundled directly with the consuming JPA implementor, this would come more natural? Just an idea.

See the problem is Hibernate Search needs to test with latest ORM way more regularly, so I can't wait for PRs to be included in WildFly, even less so if they are on hold because of even slower EAP cycles.

> >> - we should hide Javassist & Byte Buddy from being exposed to the application > > Yes, I agree. You said this before but its ORM that requires > Javassist classes to be on the application classpath. ORM does not > require the Byte Buddy classes to be on the application classpath. > >> - make Byte Buddy an option: I guess improve the JipiJapa itegration >> to support it and move it into its own private module. > > No, ORM doesn't require Byte Buddy to be on the application classpath, > which means that Byte Buddy can be what you want, a separate private > ORM module. This is a feature of WildFly modules, not JipiJapa. What I mean is that JipiJapa is currently triggering enhancement via Javassist; it's not giving me an option to use Byte Buddy instead.

So since the sources for that are in yet another project, it looks like I'd need 6 months to finish my ORM upgrade in Search. Luckily I'll aim for a different solution ;)

I think the best option in terms of supporting legacy ORM version users would be to incorporate a change in those branches to shade/shadow Javassist into ORM specific packages (in hibernate-core).

As I understand it, it is always ORM that does the enhancement, right Scott?

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:12 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > Ahh, I was confused then, your talking about the WildFly ORM static > module definition [1], which is not controlled by the JPA container or > JipiJapa. > > >> > >> We talked about this not long ago and possible solutions, the only > >> agreed on solution was to eliminate the ORM requirement for Javassist > >> classes to be on the application classpath, by switching to ByteBuddy. > > > > Like I replied to Gunnar, that's a different problem. Sorry all for > > the confusion! > > > > In this case it's Hibernate ORM which is being fed two different > > versions of Javassist simultaneously; clearly that's our fault. The > > application classpath is not affected. > > > >> Could you could use one of the previously suggested solutions in your > >> testing? For example, your application could use a shaded Javassist > >> jar, that doesn't interfere with the ORM Javassist. > > > > I'm not trying to use Javassist. If only the flags to disable it would > > work I'd be happy to disable it ;-) > > There are no flags for controlling [1], if you want control, just fork > WildFly and make occasional changes to the static module definitions > that meet your testing changes. Just keep the changes as minimal as > possible, so it is easy to sync up the (test purposes) fork. The > painful part though might be trying to push your fork to maven, so > perhaps this is a bad idea, but still wanted to mention it, in case it > could help. > > >> > >> Why don't you contribute code changes instead to WildFly? I did > >> create a pull request for https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5773 > >> that is still pending, to remove some unneeded dependencies. This > >> won't get merged without an EAP jira that goes with it, which I don't > >> plan to create, since there is no EAP need for the change. Pull > >> request is https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/9305. > > > > Thanks! Sure I'd be happy to contribute these to WildFly, but knowing > > which dependency is needed - or MIGHT be needed in certain > > configurations - requires in depth knowledge of the module one wants > > to cleanup. > > I'm not sure how you could dynamically update the ORM static module > definition [1]. > > > I just have the *impression* that some of these dependencies are no > > longer needed, but going back and forth between projects at different > > releases - and supposed to support various other versions - doesn't > > make it easy. > > ORM definitely still needs the Javassist dependency, but we should > drop ASM, as that is not needed, as well as a few others. > > > > > So I suspect that if the adaptor code itself was bundled directly with > > the consuming JPA implementor, this would come more natural? Just an > > idea. > > I agree, but others didn't when this came up on the JPA expert group > mailing list before. > > > > > See the problem is Hibernate Search needs to test with latest ORM way > > more regularly, so I can't wait for PRs to be included in WildFly, > > even less so if they are on hold because of even slower EAP cycles. > > I agree that you really need control over the static ORM module > definitions. If you don't want to fork WildFly for testing, perhaps > you could modify the static orm module definition before starting the > app server, for the testing. Sounds like a pita. > > > > >> > >>> - we should hide Javassist & Byte Buddy from being exposed to the > >>> application > >> > >> Yes, I agree. You said this before but its ORM that requires > >> Javassist classes to be on the application classpath. ORM does not > >> require the Byte Buddy classes to be on the application classpath. > >> > >>> - make Byte Buddy an option: I guess improve the JipiJapa itegration > >>> to support it and move it into its own private module. > >> > >> No, ORM doesn't require Byte Buddy to be on the application classpath, > >> which means that Byte Buddy can be what you want, a separate private > >> ORM module. This is a feature of WildFly modules, not JipiJapa. > > > > What I mean is that JipiJapa is currently triggering enhancement via > > Javassist; it's not giving me an option to use Byte Buddy instead. > > Its more that the WildFly JPA container, allows the persistence > provider to register a javax.persistence.spi.ClassTransformer > instance, to be called when entity class definitions are loaded, as > per the JPA requirements. JipiJapa doesn't get involved, as there is > a standard JPA contract that ORM uses, so JipiJapa couldn't influence > use of Byte Buddy or CGLIB or Javassist... > > > > > So since the sources for that are in yet another project, it looks > > like I'd need 6 months to finish my ORM upgrade in Search. Luckily > > I'll aim for a different solution ;) > :( > > Scott > > [1] > https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/master/feature-pack/src/main/reso... > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

The one small issue is that if the user enhanced the classes at build time (i,e. not via the ClassTransformer), then shading in a newer version of Wildfly means that the same app using the later version will fail unless you rebuild the app. BTW is Javassist Shadable, some of these libs can’t due to string referencing classnames and other fun tricks like that. Emmanuel > On 11 Jan 2017, at 17:35, Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >> I think the best option in terms of supporting legacy ORM version users >> would be to incorporate a change in those branches to shade/shadow Javassist >> into ORM specific packages (in hibernate-core). > > +1 > >> >> As I understand it, it is always ORM that does the enhancement, right Scott? > > Yes, ORM always does the enhancement. > >> >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:12 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> Ahh, I was confused then, your talking about the WildFly ORM static >>> module definition [1], which is not controlled by the JPA container or >>> JipiJapa. >>> >>>>> >>>>> We talked about this not long ago and possible solutions, the only >>>>> agreed on solution was to eliminate the ORM requirement for Javassist >>>>> classes to be on the application classpath, by switching to ByteBuddy. >>>> >>>> Like I replied to Gunnar, that's a different problem. Sorry all for >>>> the confusion! >>>> >>>> In this case it's Hibernate ORM which is being fed two different >>>> versions of Javassist simultaneously; clearly that's our fault. The >>>> application classpath is not affected. >>>> >>>>> Could you could use one of the previously suggested solutions in your >>>>> testing? For example, your application could use a shaded Javassist >>>>> jar, that doesn't interfere with the ORM Javassist. >>>> >>>> I'm not trying to use Javassist. If only the flags to disable it would >>>> work I'd be happy to disable it ;-) >>> >>> There are no flags for controlling [1], if you want control, just fork >>> WildFly and make occasional changes to the static module definitions >>> that meet your testing changes. Just keep the changes as minimal as >>> possible, so it is easy to sync up the (test purposes) fork. The >>> painful part though might be trying to push your fork to maven, so >>> perhaps this is a bad idea, but still wanted to mention it, in case it >>> could help. >>> >>>>> >>>>> Why don't you contribute code changes instead to WildFly? I did >>>>> create a pull request for https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5773 >>>>> that is still pending, to remove some unneeded dependencies. This >>>>> won't get merged without an EAP jira that goes with it, which I don't >>>>> plan to create, since there is no EAP need for the change. Pull >>>>> request is https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/9305. >>>> >>>> Thanks! Sure I'd be happy to contribute these to WildFly, but knowing >>>> which dependency is needed - or MIGHT be needed in certain >>>> configurations - requires in depth knowledge of the module one wants >>>> to cleanup. >>> >>> I'm not sure how you could dynamically update the ORM static module >>> definition [1]. >>> >>>> I just have the *impression* that some of these dependencies are no >>>> longer needed, but going back and forth between projects at different >>>> releases - and supposed to support various other versions - doesn't >>>> make it easy. >>> >>> ORM definitely still needs the Javassist dependency, but we should >>> drop ASM, as that is not needed, as well as a few others. >>> >>>> >>>> So I suspect that if the adaptor code itself was bundled directly with >>>> the consuming JPA implementor, this would come more natural? Just an >>>> idea. >>> >>> I agree, but others didn't when this came up on the JPA expert group >>> mailing list before. >>> >>>> >>>> See the problem is Hibernate Search needs to test with latest ORM way >>>> more regularly, so I can't wait for PRs to be included in WildFly, >>>> even less so if they are on hold because of even slower EAP cycles. >>> >>> I agree that you really need control over the static ORM module >>> definitions. If you don't want to fork WildFly for testing, perhaps >>> you could modify the static orm module definition before starting the >>> app server, for the testing. Sounds like a pita. >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> - we should hide Javassist & Byte Buddy from being exposed to the >>>>>> application >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I agree. You said this before but its ORM that requires >>>>> Javassist classes to be on the application classpath. ORM does not >>>>> require the Byte Buddy classes to be on the application classpath. >>>>> >>>>>> - make Byte Buddy an option: I guess improve the JipiJapa itegration >>>>>> to support it and move it into its own private module. >>>>> >>>>> No, ORM doesn't require Byte Buddy to be on the application classpath, >>>>> which means that Byte Buddy can be what you want, a separate private >>>>> ORM module. This is a feature of WildFly modules, not JipiJapa. >>>> >>>> What I mean is that JipiJapa is currently triggering enhancement via >>>> Javassist; it's not giving me an option to use Byte Buddy instead. >>> >>> Its more that the WildFly JPA container, allows the persistence >>> provider to register a javax.persistence.spi.ClassTransformer >>> instance, to be called when entity class definitions are loaded, as >>> per the JPA requirements. JipiJapa doesn't get involved, as there is >>> a standard JPA contract that ORM uses, so JipiJapa couldn't influence >>> use of Byte Buddy or CGLIB or Javassist... >>> >>>> >>>> So since the sources for that are in yet another project, it looks >>>> like I'd need 6 months to finish my ORM upgrade in Search. Luckily >>>> I'll aim for a different solution ;) >>> :( >>> >>> Scott >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/master/feature-pack/src/main/reso... >>> _______________________________________________ >>> hibernate-dev mailing list >>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Following Steve's suggestions I thought I had a reasonable and clean plan, but it's not working in practice. Turns out that even after me cleaning up all references to "org.javassist:main", it's still been forced on the classpath by hard-coded rules in the JPADependencyProcessor, so conflicting with the right version: - https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/6b61a6003f704221f66dcd9f418bcb7af... Is there any way I can prevent this injection from happening? Can I override this JPADependencyProcessor? Thanks, Sanne On 11 January 2017 at 19:42, Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > I'm not really sure but did notice that HikariCP [1] shaded the > Javassist runtime classes in 2015 and still seems to be shading > Javassist. > > Good point about about the compatibility impact, as build time > instrumentation with the non-shaded Javassist will produce a Java > archive that doesn't work with the shaded Javassist. The application > will get a CNFE exception unless they add a dependency on the unshaded > Javassist classes. I would expect the same problem when we change > from using Javassist to using Byte Buddy. > > [1] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/HikariCP/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=j... > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Emmanuel Bernard > <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >> The one small issue is that if the user enhanced the classes at build time (i,e. not via the ClassTransformer), then shading in a newer version of Wildfly means that the same app using the later version will fail unless you rebuild the app. >> BTW is Javassist Shadable, some of these libs can’t due to string referencing classnames and other fun tricks like that. >> >> Emmanuel >> >>> On 11 Jan 2017, at 17:35, Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>>> I think the best option in terms of supporting legacy ORM version users >>>> would be to incorporate a change in those branches to shade/shadow Javassist >>>> into ORM specific packages (in hibernate-core). >>> >>> +1 >>> >>>> >>>> As I understand it, it is always ORM that does the enhancement, right Scott? >>> >>> Yes, ORM always does the enhancement. >>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:12 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Ahh, I was confused then, your talking about the WildFly ORM static >>>>> module definition [1], which is not controlled by the JPA container or >>>>> JipiJapa. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We talked about this not long ago and possible solutions, the only >>>>>>> agreed on solution was to eliminate the ORM requirement for Javassist >>>>>>> classes to be on the application classpath, by switching to ByteBuddy. >>>>>> >>>>>> Like I replied to Gunnar, that's a different problem. Sorry all for >>>>>> the confusion! >>>>>> >>>>>> In this case it's Hibernate ORM which is being fed two different >>>>>> versions of Javassist simultaneously; clearly that's our fault. The >>>>>> application classpath is not affected. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you could use one of the previously suggested solutions in your >>>>>>> testing? For example, your application could use a shaded Javassist >>>>>>> jar, that doesn't interfere with the ORM Javassist. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not trying to use Javassist. If only the flags to disable it would >>>>>> work I'd be happy to disable it ;-) >>>>> >>>>> There are no flags for controlling [1], if you want control, just fork >>>>> WildFly and make occasional changes to the static module definitions >>>>> that meet your testing changes. Just keep the changes as minimal as >>>>> possible, so it is easy to sync up the (test purposes) fork. The >>>>> painful part though might be trying to push your fork to maven, so >>>>> perhaps this is a bad idea, but still wanted to mention it, in case it >>>>> could help. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why don't you contribute code changes instead to WildFly? I did >>>>>>> create a pull request for https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5773 >>>>>>> that is still pending, to remove some unneeded dependencies. This >>>>>>> won't get merged without an EAP jira that goes with it, which I don't >>>>>>> plan to create, since there is no EAP need for the change. Pull >>>>>>> request is https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/9305. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! Sure I'd be happy to contribute these to WildFly, but knowing >>>>>> which dependency is needed - or MIGHT be needed in certain >>>>>> configurations - requires in depth knowledge of the module one wants >>>>>> to cleanup. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure how you could dynamically update the ORM static module >>>>> definition [1]. >>>>> >>>>>> I just have the *impression* that some of these dependencies are no >>>>>> longer needed, but going back and forth between projects at different >>>>>> releases - and supposed to support various other versions - doesn't >>>>>> make it easy. >>>>> >>>>> ORM definitely still needs the Javassist dependency, but we should >>>>> drop ASM, as that is not needed, as well as a few others. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So I suspect that if the adaptor code itself was bundled directly with >>>>>> the consuming JPA implementor, this would come more natural? Just an >>>>>> idea. >>>>> >>>>> I agree, but others didn't when this came up on the JPA expert group >>>>> mailing list before. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> See the problem is Hibernate Search needs to test with latest ORM way >>>>>> more regularly, so I can't wait for PRs to be included in WildFly, >>>>>> even less so if they are on hold because of even slower EAP cycles. >>>>> >>>>> I agree that you really need control over the static ORM module >>>>> definitions. If you don't want to fork WildFly for testing, perhaps >>>>> you could modify the static orm module definition before starting the >>>>> app server, for the testing. Sounds like a pita. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - we should hide Javassist & Byte Buddy from being exposed to the >>>>>>>> application >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, I agree. You said this before but its ORM that requires >>>>>>> Javassist classes to be on the application classpath. ORM does not >>>>>>> require the Byte Buddy classes to be on the application classpath. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - make Byte Buddy an option: I guess improve the JipiJapa itegration >>>>>>>> to support it and move it into its own private module. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, ORM doesn't require Byte Buddy to be on the application classpath, >>>>>>> which means that Byte Buddy can be what you want, a separate private >>>>>>> ORM module. This is a feature of WildFly modules, not JipiJapa. >>>>>> >>>>>> What I mean is that JipiJapa is currently triggering enhancement via >>>>>> Javassist; it's not giving me an option to use Byte Buddy instead. >>>>> >>>>> Its more that the WildFly JPA container, allows the persistence >>>>> provider to register a javax.persistence.spi.ClassTransformer >>>>> instance, to be called when entity class definitions are loaded, as >>>>> per the JPA requirements. JipiJapa doesn't get involved, as there is >>>>> a standard JPA contract that ORM uses, so JipiJapa couldn't influence >>>>> use of Byte Buddy or CGLIB or Javassist... >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So since the sources for that are in yet another project, it looks >>>>>> like I'd need 6 months to finish my ORM upgrade in Search. Luckily >>>>>> I'll aim for a different solution ;) >>>>> :( >>>>> >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/master/feature-pack/src/main/reso... >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list >>>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >>> _______________________________________________ >>> hibernate-dev mailing list >>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

To be clear... ORM is "expecting the application classpath to include Javassist dependency" because it will need it for the *proxies* Hibernate returns to be usable once they get them from Hibernate. It may or may not *need* the application classpath to include Javassist dependency if the application is using bytecode generation and *not proxies*. I have not played with this specifically. On the bytecode generation side I am pretty sure Rafeal said Byte Buddy would not be needed on the application's classpath. No idea about proxies. Just in general I think generated proxies are always going to need the underlying library available. On Thu, Jan 12, 2017, 8:36 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > No, not currently. We created > https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8474 to move the exporting of > Javassist, to the WildFly static ORM module, so that Hibernate native > applications would automatically get the Javassist classes. That > wouldn't of directly addressed your situation but it would of updated > the WildFly JPA container (JPADependencyProcessor class) to no longer > do the javassist export, so you would of had more control. I don't > think that https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/8474 is likely to > be merged. Instead, ORM needs to stop expecting the application > classpath to include Javassist dependency and then we can update > JPADependencyProcessor to stop exporting Javassist. > > Perhaps we could discuss this in person soon, to see if we are all on > the same page. My current understanding is that this will be > addressed when we switch to Byte Buddy, but the shading (Javassist) > idea may also help, as we could stop exporting Javassist from the > WildFly JPA container. > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:36 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; > wrote: > > Following Steve's suggestions I thought I had a reasonable and clean > > plan, but it's not working in practice. > > > > Turns out that even after me cleaning up all references to > > "org.javassist:main", it's still been forced on the classpath by > > hard-coded rules in the JPADependencyProcessor, so conflicting with > > the right version: > > - > > https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/6b61a6003f704221f66dcd9f418bcb7af... > > > > Is there any way I can prevent this injection from happening? Can I > > override this JPADependencyProcessor? > > > > Thanks, > > Sanne > > > > On 11 January 2017 at 19:42, Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> I'm not really sure but did notice that HikariCP [1] shaded the > >> Javassist runtime classes in 2015 and still seems to be shading > >> Javassist. > >> > >> Good point about about the compatibility impact, as build time > >> instrumentation with the non-shaded Javassist will produce a Java > >> archive that doesn't work with the shaded Javassist. The application > >> will get a CNFE exception unless they add a dependency on the unshaded > >> Javassist classes. I would expect the same problem when we change > >> from using Javassist to using Byte Buddy. > >> > >> [1] > >> https://github.com/brettwooldridge/HikariCP/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=j... > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Emmanuel Bernard > >> <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >>> The one small issue is that if the user enhanced the classes at build > >>> time (i,e. not via the ClassTransformer), then shading in a newer version of > >>> Wildfly means that the same app using the later version will fail unless you > >>> rebuild the app. > >>> BTW is Javassist Shadable, some of these libs can’t due to string > >>> referencing classnames and other fun tricks like that. > >>> > >>> Emmanuel > >>> > >>>> On 11 Jan 2017, at 17:35, Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Steve Ebersole > >>>> <steve(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >>>>> I think the best option in terms of supporting legacy ORM version > >>>>> users > >>>>> would be to incorporate a change in those branches to shade/shadow > >>>>> Javassist > >>>>> into ORM specific packages (in hibernate-core). > >>>> > >>>> +1 > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> As I understand it, it is always ORM that does the enhancement, > >>>>> right Scott? > >>>> > >>>> Yes, ORM always does the enhancement. > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:12 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow(a)redhat.com&gt; > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ahh, I was confused then, your talking about the WildFly ORM static > >>>>>> module definition [1], which is not controlled by the JPA container > >>>>>> or > >>>>>> JipiJapa. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We talked about this not long ago and possible solutions, the > >>>>>>>> only > >>>>>>>> agreed on solution was to eliminate the ORM requirement for > >>>>>>>> Javassist > >>>>>>>> classes to be on the application classpath, by switching to > >>>>>>>> ByteBuddy. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Like I replied to Gunnar, that's a different problem. Sorry all > >>>>>>> for > >>>>>>> the confusion! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In this case it's Hibernate ORM which is being fed two different > >>>>>>> versions of Javassist simultaneously; clearly that's our fault. > >>>>>>> The > >>>>>>> application classpath is not affected. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Could you could use one of the previously suggested solutions in > >>>>>>>> your > >>>>>>>> testing? For example, your application could use a shaded > >>>>>>>> Javassist > >>>>>>>> jar, that doesn't interfere with the ORM Javassist. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I'm not trying to use Javassist. If only the flags to disable it > >>>>>>> would > >>>>>>> work I'd be happy to disable it ;-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> There are no flags for controlling [1], if you want control, just > >>>>>> fork > >>>>>> WildFly and make occasional changes to the static module > >>>>>> definitions > >>>>>> that meet your testing changes. Just keep the changes as minimal > >>>>>> as > >>>>>> possible, so it is easy to sync up the (test purposes) fork. The > >>>>>> painful part though might be trying to push your fork to maven, so > >>>>>> perhaps this is a bad idea, but still wanted to mention it, in case > >>>>>> it > >>>>>> could help. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Why don't you contribute code changes instead to WildFly? I did > >>>>>>>> create a pull request for > >>>>>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-5773 > >>>>>>>> that is still pending, to remove some unneeded dependencies. > >>>>>>>> This > >>>>>>>> won't get merged without an EAP jira that goes with it, which I > >>>>>>>> don't > >>>>>>>> plan to create, since there is no EAP need for the change. Pull > >>>>>>>> request is https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/9305. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks! Sure I'd be happy to contribute these to WildFly, but > >>>>>>> knowing > >>>>>>> which dependency is needed - or MIGHT be needed in certain > >>>>>>> configurations - requires in depth knowledge of the module one > >>>>>>> wants > >>>>>>> to cleanup. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm not sure how you could dynamically update the ORM static module > >>>>>> definition [1]. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I just have the *impression* that some of these dependencies are > >>>>>>> no > >>>>>>> longer needed, but going back and forth between projects at > >>>>>>> different > >>>>>>> releases - and supposed to support various other versions - > >>>>>>> doesn't > >>>>>>> make it easy. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ORM definitely still needs the Javassist dependency, but we should > >>>>>> drop ASM, as that is not needed, as well as a few others. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> So I suspect that if the adaptor code itself was bundled directly > >>>>>>> with > >>>>>>> the consuming JPA implementor, this would come more natural? Just > >>>>>>> an > >>>>>>> idea. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I agree, but others didn't when this came up on the JPA expert > >>>>>> group > >>>>>> mailing list before. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> See the problem is Hibernate Search needs to test with latest ORM > >>>>>>> way > >>>>>>> more regularly, so I can't wait for PRs to be included in WildFly, > >>>>>>> even less so if they are on hold because of even slower EAP > >>>>>>> cycles. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I agree that you really need control over the static ORM module > >>>>>> definitions. If you don't want to fork WildFly for testing, > >>>>>> perhaps > >>>>>> you could modify the static orm module definition before starting > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> app server, for the testing. Sounds like a pita. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> - we should hide Javassist & Byte Buddy from being exposed to > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> application > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Yes, I agree. You said this before but its ORM that requires > >>>>>>>> Javassist classes to be on the application classpath. ORM does > >>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>> require the Byte Buddy classes to be on the application > >>>>>>>> classpath. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> - make Byte Buddy an option: I guess improve the JipiJapa > >>>>>>>>> itegration > >>>>>>>>> to support it and move it into its own private module. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> No, ORM doesn't require Byte Buddy to be on the application > >>>>>>>> classpath, > >>>>>>>> which means that Byte Buddy can be what you want, a separate > >>>>>>>> private > >>>>>>>> ORM module. This is a feature of WildFly modules, not JipiJapa. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> What I mean is that JipiJapa is currently triggering enhancement > >>>>>>> via > >>>>>>> Javassist; it's not giving me an option to use Byte Buddy instead. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Its more that the WildFly JPA container, allows the persistence > >>>>>> provider to register a javax.persistence.spi.ClassTransformer > >>>>>> instance, to be called when entity class definitions are loaded, as > >>>>>> per the JPA requirements. JipiJapa doesn't get involved, as there > >>>>>> is > >>>>>> a standard JPA contract that ORM uses, so JipiJapa couldn't > >>>>>> influence > >>>>>> use of Byte Buddy or CGLIB or Javassist... > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> So since the sources for that are in yet another project, it looks > >>>>>>> like I'd need 6 months to finish my ORM upgrade in Search. Luckily > >>>>>>> I'll aim for a different solution ;) > >>>>>> :( > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Scott > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [1] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/blob/master/feature-pack/src/main/reso... > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> hibernate-dev mailing list > >>>>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> hibernate-dev mailing list > >>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> hibernate-dev mailing list > >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

> ## Suggestions? > I'm stuck again on Hibernate Search upgrading to latest ORM so I'll > see to apply the workaround without waiting for the proper solution. > Not sure which actions I should take on ORM? > > Personally I think I'd just patch the modules to use the older > Javassist when running on WildFly; that upgrade should wait for either > WildFly to upgrade, or use to rethink these modules. > > Scott, could you help me by verifying if and were I should open a JIRA > for those properties being ignored? I'm surprised that setting jboss.as.jpa.classtransformer to false, doesn't help. WildFly does have a org.jboss.as.test.integration.jpa.mockprovider.classtransformer.ClassFileTransformerTestCase test that ensures that jboss.as.jpa.classtransformer=true works but doesn't verify that jboss.as.jpa.classtransformer=false also works. This would probably help verify that it works.

Scott > > Thanks, > Sanne > > 1 - https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/WFLY10/JPA+Reference+Guide#JPARefer... > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev