Here is my use case:
case class Organization(id: String = UUID.randomUUID().toString, userId: String)
case class OrganizationState(organization: Option[Organization])
case CreateOrganization extends OrganizationCommand
case OrganizationCreated extends OrganizationEvent
class OrganizationEntity extends PersistentEntity[OrganizationCommand, OrganizationEvent, OrganizationState]
POST /organizations?userId=1 <= creates an organization associated with user 1
GET /organizations?userId=1 <= retrieves all organizations associated with user 1
How can I implement my service in order to insure consistency ?
I try using a CassandraReadSide to maintain a table mapping userId with organizationId but this table is eventually consistent.
Do I need to create another Entity with the userId as entityId ?
In fun-cqrs, there is the Projection.onEvent that allows to know when an event was processed by a projection.
See https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lagom-framework/JG71x5W5h7I
Readside is the answer as you point out. It is of course eventually consistent. Alternatively you can create another entity and have one entity directly invoke the other but it will still be eventually consistent from the perspective of the client.
The question you have to ask yourself is why the POST and GET have to be immediately consistent? There are ways of accomplishing this but the trade offs you make would usually impact performance and may not align with lagom.
Related
I have a two aggregate roots in my domain, and therefore two repositories. We'll call them BookRepository, and AuthorRepository, for the sake of example.
I'm designing an MVC application, and one page has to display a table containing a list of authors, with each row showing the author's personal details. At the end of each row is a small button that can be clicked to expand the row and show a child table detailing the author's published books.
When the page loads, some ajax is executed to retrieve the Author details from an API controller and display the data in the table. Each property in an Author object maps almost directly to a column, with one exception, and this is where I'm having my problem. I want the button at the end of each row to be disabled, if and only if the author has no published books. This means that a boolean has to returned with each Author record, indicating if they have any published books.
My book repository has a couple of methods like this:
public IEnumerable<Book> GetBooksForAuthor(int authorId);
public bool AnyBooksForAuthor(int authorId);
and my Book class has a property called AuthorId, so I can retrieve a book's author by calling
authorRepository.GetById(book.AuthorId);
My problem is that in order to create a row for my aforementioned table, I need to create it like this:
IEnumerable<Author> authors = authorRepository.GetAll();
foreach (Author author in authors)
{
yield return new AuthorTableRow
{
Name = author.Name,
Age = author.Age,
Location = author.PlaceOfResidence.Name,
HasBooks = this.bookRepository.AnyBooksForAuthor(author.Id)
};
}
The above code seems correct, but there's a fairly heft performance penalty in calling this.bookRepository.AnyBooksForAuthor(author.Id) for every single author, because it performs a database call each time.
Ideally, I suppose I would want an AuthorTableRowRepository which could perform something like the following:
public IEnumerable<AuthorTableRow> GetAll()
{
return from a in this.dbContext.Authors
select new AuthorTableRow
{
Name = a.Name,
Age = a.Age,
Location a.PlaceOfResidence.Name
HasBooks = a.Books.Any()
});
}
I'm hesitant to put this in place for these reasons :
AuthorTableRowRepository is a repository of AuthorTableRows, but AuthorTable row is not a domain object, nor an aggregate root, and therefore should not have its own repository.
As Author and Book are both aggregate roots, I removed the "Books" property from the Author entity, because I wanted the only way to retrieve books to be via the BookRepository. This makes HasBooks = a.Books.Any() impossible. I am unsure whether I am imposing my own misguided best practice here though. It seems wrong to obtain Books by obtaining an Author via the AuthorRepository and then going through its Books property, and vice versa in obtaining an Author via a property on a Book object. Crossing aggregate root boundaries would be the way I'd term it, I suppose?
How would other people solve this? Are my concerns unfounded? I am mostly concerned about the (what should be a) performance hit in the first method, but I want to adhere to best practice with the Repository pattern and DDD.
I would stick to the first approach, but try to optimize things in the bookrepository method. For instance, you can load this information all in one time, and use in-memory lookup to speed this up. Like this you would need 2 queries, and not 1 for each author.
The way I solved this in the end was to create an Entity from a view in the database. I named the entity 'AuthorSummary', and made an AuthorSummaryRepository that didn't contain any Add() methods, just retrieval methods.
I have an entity group in objectify, typical SomeParentClass and SomeChildClass. I want to do something like this to load an instance of SomeChildClass from the datastore.
ofy().load.type(SomeChildClass.class).id(idOfSomeChildClassInstace);
This is returning nothing found. Seems that you need to know the parent of SomeChildClass to get it from the datestore. This I know works.
Key<SomeChildClass> k = Key.create(someParentClass.generateKey(), SomeChildClass.class, idOfSomeChildClassInstace);
ofy().load().key(k).now;
What if I want to load an instance of SomeChildClass without knowing the parent, by just having the id of SomeChildClass.
You cannot do that - the actual full identifier of an entity is the kind and id of each of its ancestors as well as it's own kind and id. That is why building the full key works, but using just the child entity id does not. Another way of looking at it that ids are only unique between siblings of the same parent.
The easiest way to solve your issue is to produce a key for your child entity, then get the 'web safe string' for it. This string contains all the information of the entity and all it's parents and can be used to fully reconstitute the full id.
Using objectify:
String websafeKey = Key.create(parentKey, Entity.class, id).getString();
Key<Entity> key = Key.create(websafeKey);
You can also do this with the low level api if you need to.
You need to know the whole Key to be able to get() an entity. A child key consists of: kind, ID and parent key. So you need to provide all three.
I have an Open JPA entity and it successfully connects a many-to-many relationship. Right now I successfully get the entire table, but I really only want the ID's from that tables. I plan on calling the database later to reconstruct the entities that I need (according to the flow of my program).
I need only the ID's (or one column from that table).
1) Should I try and restrict this in my entity beans, or in the stateless session beans that I will be using to call the entity beans
2) If I try and do this using JPA, how can I specify that I only get back the ID's from the table, instead of the whole table? So far looking online, I don't see a way that you can do this. So I am guessing there is no way to do this.
3) If I simply just manipulate the return values, should I create a separate class that I will be returning to the user that will return only the required id list to the user?
I could be completely wrong here, but from the looks of it, I don't think there is a simple way to do this using JPA and I will have to return a custom object instead of the entity bean to the user (this custom object would only hold the id's as opposed to the whole table as it currently does)
Any thoughts... I don't think this is really relevant, but people are always asking for code, so here you go...
#ManyToMany(fetch=FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinTable(name="QUICK_LAUNCH_DISTLIST",
joinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="QUICK_LAUNCH_ID"),
inverseJoinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="LIST_ID"))
private List<DistributionList> distributionlistList;
Currently how I get the entire collection of records. Remember I only want the id...
try
{
//int daSize = 0;
//System.out.println("Testing 1.2..3...! ");
qlList = emf.createNamedQuery("getQuickLaunch").getResultList();
}
This is how I call the Entity beans. I am thinking this is where I will have to programatically go through and create a custom object similar to the entity bean (but it just has the ID's and not the whole table, and attempt to put the id's in there somewhere.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks
I believe I just figured out the best solution to this problem.
This link would be the answer:
my other stack overflow answer post
But for the sake of those too lazy to click on the link I essentially used the #ElementCollection attribute...
#ElementCollection(fetch=FetchType.EAGER)
#CollectionTable(name="QUICK_LAUNCH_DISTLIST",joinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="QUICK_LAUNCH_ID"))
#Column(name="LIST_ID")
private List<Long> distListIDs;
That did it.
Sounds like you want something like this in your quickLaunch class:
#Transient
public List<Integer> getDistributionListIds () {
List<Integer> distributionListIds = new LinkedList<Integer>();
List<DistributionList> distributionlistList = getDistributionlistList();
if (distributionlistList != null) {
for (DistributionList distributionList : distributionlistList)
distributionListIds.add(distributionList.getId());
}
return distributionListIds;
}
I had to guess a little at the names of your getters/setters and the type of DistributionList's ID. But basically, JPA is already nicely handling all of the relationships for you, so just take the values you want from the related objects.
I was wondering with Entity Framework 4.1 code first how do you guys handle queries that involve an existing aspnet_Users table?
Basically I have a requirement for a query that involves the aspnet_Users so that I can return the username:
SELECT t.Prop1, u.Username
FROM Table1 t
INNER JOIN aspnet_User u ON t.UserId = u.UserId
Where t.Prop2 = true
Ideally in linq I would like:
from t in context.Table1
join u in context.aspnet_Users on t.UserId equals u.UserId
where t.Prop2 = true
But I'm not sure how to get aspnet_Users mapping to a class User? how do I make aspnet_Users part of my dbset ?
Any help would be appreciated, thanks in advance
Don't map aspnet_Users table or any other table related to aspnet. These tables have their own data access and their own logic for accessing. Mapping these tables will introduce code duplication, possible problems and breaks separation of concerns. If you need users for queries, create view with only needed information like id, user name, email and map the view. The point is that view will be read only, it will contain only allowed data and your application will not accidentally modify these data without using ASP.NET API.
First read Ladislav's answer. If you still want to go ahead : to do what you want would involve mapping the users and roles and members tables into the codefirst domain - which means writing a membership provider in code-first.
Luckily there is a project for that http://codefirstmembership.codeplex.com/ although its not a perfect implementation. The original is VB, look in the Discussion tab for my work on getting it running in c# MVC.
I'm working with the author on a better implementation that protects the membership data (password, last logged on date, all of the non-allowed data) but allow you to map and extend the user table. But its not ready yet!
You don't really need to use Entity Framework to access aspnet_membership provider accounts. You really just need to create an instance of the membership object, pass in a unique user identifier and a Boolean value indicating whether to update the LastActivityDate value for the user and the method returns a MembershipUser object populated with current values from the data source for the specified user.
You can then access the username by using the property of "Username".
Example:
private MembershipUser user =
Membership.GetUser(7578ec40-9e91-4458-b3d6-0a69dee82c6e, True);
Response.Write(user.UserName);
In case you have additional questions about MembershipProvider, you can read up on it on the MSDN website under the title of "Managing Users by Using Membership".
Hope this helps you some with your requirement.
Say I'm modeling a school, so I have 2 Entities: Student and Class. For whatever reason, I want each class roster to have a custom sort order. In a simple relationship, this would mean giving Student a sortOrder attribute and just sorting the list by this number. Issue is, a Student might be order 3 in one Class and order 6 in another. How would I store these orderings in Core Data in a way that I can easily access them and sort my lists properly?
Student Class
classes <<--------->> students
^ ^
| |
unordered ordered
This diagram might help explain what I'm trying to do. The students "roster" I would want to be fetched in a specific order stored somewhere, which could be any ordering. Storing this ordering is what I'm not sure how to do in a way that's the most efficient. Creating a bunch of Order objects and trying to manage the links sounds like a lot of overhead, and it feels like there must be a better way.
If the ordering of students can be described by one or more NSSortDescriptors, you could create a fetched property on the Class entity that fetches the students and applies the sort descriptor. Alternatively, it may be easier (depending on your use case) to apply the sort descriptor(s) to the NSFetchedResultsController that you're using to deal with the class' students collection.
If you can't use an NSSortDescriptor, then you'll need an index attribute (or name of your choice) on the Student entity if there's only one ordering or a collection of Order entities describing the index in each ordering for each Student. You'll be responsible for maintaing these index values. Unfortunately, there's no easy way to do this in Core Data. It's just a lot of work.
Student <<->> StudentClass <<->> Class
StudentClass
----
studentID
order
classID
Then you can select as necessary.
For example, you have a student. Fetch all StudentClass where StudentID is student.studentID. You then have the order, as well as access to the Class.
You'll likely want to add some business logic to make your life easier. Also, if you're not already using it, take a peek at MOGenerator: https://github.com/rentzsch/mogenerator
EDIT: I'd really like to know why this is getting voted down. Comments would be much appreciated.