DATAREST-1383 causes top level properties with @JsonSetter to be missed. [DATAREST-1573]

[spring-projects-issues]

Joseph Valerio opened DATAREST-1573 and commented

We just upgraded to SpringBoot 2.3.2.

We are using spring datarest 3.3.2 with JPA against a RDBMS

We use a PATCH to update our user's passwords.  We have a setter on our User Object setPassword() annotated with @JsonSetter, but there is no corresponding persisted property.  This method is used to set the persisted encryptedPassword property on the user.  The following commit on DomainObjectReader causes this to no longer work:

c616c53

229:       if (!mappedProperties.hasPersistentPropertyForField(fieldName)) {				 
230:           i.remove();
231:           continue;
232:       }

The i.remove on line 230 removes the password property from consideration since it is not a PersistentProperty  

If this property is not removed, it will cause the setter to be invoked at line 285:

 

return mapper.readerForUpdating(target).readValue(root);

 

If we change the Method to a PUT this works correctly, but it should also work for patch.

If you are not following my explaination, I can create a test project to expose the issue on request

---

1 votes, 2 watchers

[spring-projects-issues]

Joseph Valerio commented

I think you need something like this:

      if (!mappedProperties.isWritableProperty(fieldName)) {

        if(!isPropertyJsonWritable(target, fieldName))
          i.remove();

        continue;
      }

...

  private boolean isPropertyJsonWritable(Object bean, String fieldName) {

    BeanWrapper wrapper = new BeanWrapperImpl();
    if(wrapper.isWritableProperty(fieldName)) {
      if(wrapper.getWrappedClass().getAnnotation(JsonSetter.class) != null)
        return true;
      if(wrapper.getWrappedClass().getAnnotation(JsonProperty.class).access() == Access.READ_ONLY)
        return false;

      // default to writable if nothing else
      return true;
    }

    return false;

  }

I know this is brute force-ish, but it conveys the idea that I am proposing.  We can not just rely on the persistent property information for determining if this property is writable

[spring-projects-issues]

bschoenmaeckers commented

duplicate of  DATAREST-1524

[darioseidl]

I believe this is essentially the same issue as #1928 edit: and also #1881.