As per Spring documentation, the steps to use Spring JdbcTemplate is as follows:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:context="http://www.springframework.org/schema/context" xsi:schemaLocation=" http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-3.0.xsd http://www.springframework.org/schema/context http://www.springframework.org/schema/context/spring-context-3.0.xsd"> <!-- Scans within the base package of the application for @Components to configure as beans --> <context:component-scan base-package="org.springframework.docs.test" /> <bean id="dataSource" class="org.apache.commons.dbcp.BasicDataSource" destroy-method="close"> <property name="driverClassName" value="${jdbc.driverClassName}"/> <property name="url" value="${jdbc.url}"/> <property name="username" value="${jdbc.username}"/> <property name="password" value="${jdbc.password}"/> </bean> <context:property-placeholder location="jdbc.properties"/> </beans>
And then,
@Repository public class JdbcCorporateEventDao implements CorporateEventDao { private JdbcTemplate jdbcTemplate; @Autowired public void setDataSource(DataSource dataSource) { this.jdbcTemplate = new JdbcTemplate(dataSource); } // JDBC-backed implementations of the methods on the CorporateEventDao follow... }
Basically, the JdbcTemplate is created inside the Component class using the setter for datasource.
Is there anything wrong with doing it this way instead so that there is exactly ONE instance of jdbcTemplate in the application?
<bean id="jdbcTemplate" class="org.springframework.jdbc.core.JdbcTemplate" p:dataSource-ref="dataSource" />
And then injecting the jdbcTemplate itself directly into the Component
@Repository public class JdbcCorporateEventDao implements CorporateEventDao { @Resource("jdbcTemplate") private JdbcTemplate jdbcTemplate; // JDBC-backed implementations of the methods on the CorporateEventDao follow... }
Is there a reason why the jdbcTemplate itself must not be injected into the component class directly?
SGB
HibernateTemplate v/s JdbcTemplate Spring provides support for both hibernate and JDBC template classes. It provides template classes which contains all common code. But JDBC as we all know is not an ORM tool it does not represent rows as objects whereas Hibernate does that.
Functionally, there's no difference between Spring's JdbcTemplate and it's variant, NamedParameterJdbcTemplate except for : NamedParameterJdbcTemplate provides a better approach for assigning sql dynamic parameters instead of using multiple '?' in the statement.
The JdbcTemplate can be used within a DAO implementation through direct instantiation with a DataSource reference, or be configured in a Spring IoC container and given to DAOs as a bean reference. The DataSource should always be configured as a bean in the Spring IoC container.
Advantage of using SpringJDBC over Traditional JDBC API JdbcTemplate provides a great exception handling mechanism that is more specific to deal with the database, it converts the standard JDBC SQLExceptions into RuntimeExceptions which are generic and more informative, allowing developers to better identify the error.
You can do what you want. The javadoc of JdbcTemplate even clearly says it:
Can be used within a service implementation via direct instantiation with a DataSource reference, or get prepared in an application context and given to services as bean reference.
In the spring-context.xml add the following and
<bean id="jdbcTemplate" class="org.springframework.jdbc.core.JdbcTemplate"> <property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/> </bean>
and directly you can use jdbcTemplate by autowiring like
@Autowired JdbcTemplate jdbcTemplate;
example:
this.jdbcTemplate.query("select * from ******",new RowMapper());
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With