I am trying to use DBIx:Class. I have successfully created the Schema class using DBIx:class::Schema::Loader.
I can also connect to the database.
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use Test::More tests => 5;
use_ok('Models::ModelRole');
use_ok('Models::User');
my $model = Models::User->new();
cmp_ok($model->{ModelName}, 'eq', 'User', 'model name');
ok($model->connect(), "connect"); #works
ok($model->{schema}->resultset('User'));
The last test returns the error message:
DBIx::Class::Schema::source(): Can't find source for User at ./tests/ModelsTests.pl line 29
This is the structure of the generated class from DBIx:Class::Schema::Loader:
This is the model user class:
package Models::User;
use DB::Glued::Schema::Result::User;
use Models::ModelRole;
use Moose;
with 'Models::ModelRole';
sub BUILD {
my $self = shift;
$self->{schema} = Glued::Schema::Result::User->new();
my #name = split('::', __PACKAGE__);
$self->{ModelName} = $name[-1];
}
1;
I hope this is enough information.
Schemata/models have to be connected to a source. The DBIC code is only describing the data and its relationships. It's entirely agnostic about the source/connection.
So you must connect DB::Glued::Schema to be able to exercise the model. The best way for tests, I think, is to connect to an in :memory: SQLite DB. The DB will be empty of course. There are a few options/approaches for populating it if you need fixtures. Search metacpan if you do.
There is a nice package to make test connections simple for you: Test::DBIx::Class.
Related
I'm currently developing a small single-page Web app using Mojolicious. The app has a Javascript frontend (using Backbone) that talks to a REST-ish API; the layout of the source is roughly:
use Mojolicious::Lite;
# ... setup code ...
get '/' => sub {
my $c = shift;
# fetch+stash data for bootstrapped collections...
$c->render('app_template');
};
get '/api_endpoint' => sub {
my $c = shift;
# fetch appropriate API data...
$c->render(json => $response);
};
# ... more API endpoints ...
app->start;
The app template uses EP, but very minimally; the only server-side template directives just insert JSON for bootstrapped collections. It's deployed via Apache as a plain CGI script. (This isn't optimal, but it's for low-traffic internal use, and more intricate server configuration is problematic in context.) Perl CGI is configured via mod_perl.
This works most of the time, but occasionally the renderer somehow gets the idea that it should cache the template and ignore changes to it. The debug records in error_log show "Rendering cached template" rather than the normal "Rendering template", and my new changes to the template stop appearing in the browser. I can't find a reliable way to stop this, though it will eventually stop on its own according to conditions I can't discern.
How can I make the app notice template changes reliably? Alternatively, how can I disable template caching completely?
How can I make the app notice template changes reliably?
This is what the morbo development server is for. Morbo wouldn't be used for your live code deployment, but for a development environment where you are continually changing your code and templates. Generally changes to live code and templates are meant to be handled by restarting the application server, or Apache in your case. (Hypnotoad has a hot-restart capability for this purpose)
Alternatively, how can I disable template caching completely?
To do this, add the following setup code (outside of routes, after use Mojolicious::Lite):
app->renderer->cache->max_keys(0);
For old answer see below.
I turned the findings of this answer into a plugin and released it on CPAN as Mojolicious::Plugin::Renderer::WithoutCache after discussing wit Grinnz on IRC, where they encouraged a release.
You can use it like this:
use Mojolicious::Lite;
plugin 'Renderer::WithoutCache';
It will create a new Cache object that does nothing, and install that globally into the renderer. That way, it doesn't need to be created every time like my initial answer below did.
In theory, this should be faster than Grinnz' approach (which is more sensible), and since you explicitly don't want to cache, you obviously want things to be as fast as possible, right? It's supposedly faster because the real Mojo::Cache would still need to go and try to set the cache, but then abort because there are no more free keys, and it also would try to look up the values from the cache every time.
I benchmarked this with both Dumbbench and Benchmark. Both of them showed negligible results. I ran them each a couple of times, but they fluctuated a lot, and it's not clear which one is faster. I included output of a run where my implementation was faster, but it still shows how minuscule the difference is.
Benchmark with Dumbbench:
use Dumbbench;
use Mojolicious::Renderer;
use Mojolicious::Controller;
use Mojolicious::Plugin::Renderer::WithoutCache::Cache;
my $controller = Mojolicious::Controller->new;
my $renderer_zero_keys = Mojolicious::Renderer->new;
$renderer_zero_keys->cache->max_keys(0);
my $renderer_nocache = Mojolicious::Renderer->new;
$renderer_nocache->cache( Mojolicious::Plugin::Renderer::WithoutCache::Cache->new );
my $bench = Dumbbench->new(
target_rel_precision => 0.005,
initial_runs => 5000,
);
$bench->add_instances(
Dumbbench::Instance::PerlSub->new(
name => 'max_keys',
code => sub {
$renderer_zero_keys->render( $controller, { text => 'foobar' } );
}
),
Dumbbench::Instance::PerlSub->new(
name => 'WithoutCache',
code => sub {
$renderer_nocache->render( $controller, { text => 'foobar' } );
}
),
);
$bench->run;
$bench->report;
__END__
max_keys: Ran 8544 iterations (3335 outliers).
max_keys: Rounded run time per iteration: 5.19018e-06 +/- 4.1e-10 (0.0%)
WithoutCache: Ran 5512 iterations (341 outliers).
WithoutCache: Rounded run time per iteration: 5.0802e-06 +/- 5.6e-09 (0.1%)
Benchmark with Benchmark:
use Benchmark 'cmpthese';
use Mojolicious::Renderer;
use Mojolicious::Controller;
use Mojolicious::Plugin::Renderer::WithoutCache::Cache;
my $controller = Mojolicious::Controller->new;
my $renderer_zero_keys = Mojolicious::Renderer->new;
$renderer_zero_keys->cache->max_keys(0);
my $renderer_nocache = Mojolicious::Renderer->new;
$renderer_nocache->cache( Mojolicious::Plugin::Renderer::WithoutCache::Cache->new );
cmpthese(
-5,
{
'max_keys' => sub {
$renderer_zero_keys->render( $controller, { text => 'foobar' } );
},
'WithoutCache' => sub {
$renderer_nocache->render( $controller, { text => 'foobar' } );
},
}
);
__END__
Rate max_keys WithoutCache
max_keys 190934/s -- -2%
WithoutCache 193846/s 2% --
I recon in a heavy load environment with lots of calls it would eventually make a difference, but that is very hard to prove. So if you don't like to think about the internals of the cache, this plugin might be useful.
Old answer:
Looking at Mojolicious::Plugin::EPRenderer I found out that there is a cache. It's a Mojo::Cache instance, which has the methods get, set and max_keys, and inherits from Mojo::Base (like probably everything in Mojolicious).
The ::EPRenderer gets a $renderer, which is a Mojolicious::Renderer. It holds the Mojo::Cache instance. I looked at $c with Data::Printer, and found out that there is a $c->app that holds all of those.
Knowing this, you can easily make your own cache class that does nothing.
package Renderer::NoCache;
use Mojo::Base -base;
sub get {}
sub set {}
sub max_keys {}
Now you stick it into $c.
package Foo;
use Mojolicious::Lite;
get '/' => sub {
my $c = shift;
$c->app->renderer->cache( Renderer::NoCache->new );
$c->render(template => 'foo', name => 'World');
};
app->start;
__DATA__
## foo.html.ep
Hello <%= $name =%>.
Now every attempt to get or set the cache simply does nothing. It will try caching, but it will never find anything.
Of course it's not great to make a new object every time. It would be better to make that object once at startup and get it into the internal permanent version of app. You have CGI, so it might not make a difference.
You could also just monkey-patch the get out of Mojo::Cache. This more hacky approach will do the same thing:
package Foo;
use Mojolicious::Lite;
*Mojo::Cache::get = sub { };
get '/' => sub {
my $c = shift;
$c->render(template => 'foo', name => 'World');
};
app->start;
But beware: we just disabled fetching from every cache in your application that uses Mojo::Cache. This might not be what you want.
I'm going to import some perl code with the require statement. The code I'd like to import is in mylibA.pl:
#!/usr/bin/perl
package FOO::BAR;
sub routine {
print "A message!\n";
}
and mylibB.pl:
#!/usr/bin/perl
package FOO::BAZ;
sub routine {
print "Another message!\n";
}
Then I'm going to use it like this:
#!/usr/bin/perl
foreach my $lib (qw/ mylibA.pl mylibB.pl /){
require $lib;
print "Make a call to ${lib}'s &routine!\n";
}
Is there a way for my script to figure out the namespace that was pulled in with the require statement?
Wow. I have to say this is the one of the most interesting Perl questions I've seen in a while. On the surface this seems like a very simple request - get an included module's namespace, but there really is no way to do this. You can get it while in the package, but not from outside the package. I tried using EXPORT to send the local package name back to the caller script but that ended up going nowhere given the difference in how "use" and "require" work. A more module type of approach probably would have worked with a "use" statement, but the requirement that the required script be able to run by themselves prevented that approach. The only thing left to do was to directly pollute the caller's namespace and hope for the best (assume that the caller had no package namespace) - something that modules are designed to prevent.
BTW - I can't believe this actually works - in strict mode, no less.
caller.pl
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
#package SomePackageName; #if you enable this then this will fail to work
our $ExportedPackageName;
print "Current package=".__PACKAGE__."\n";
foreach my $lib (qw/ mylibA.pl mylibB.pl /){
require $lib;
print "Make a call to ${lib}'s &routine!\n";
print "Package name exported=".$ExportedPackageName."\n";
$ExportedPackageName->routine;
} #end foreach
print "Normal Exit";
exit;
__END__
mylibA.pl
#!/usr/bin/perl
package FOO::BAR;
use strict;
#better hope the caller does not have a package namespace
$main::ExportedPackageName=__PACKAGE__;
sub routine {
print "A message from ".__PACKAGE__."!\n";
}
1;
mylibB.pl
#!/usr/bin/perl
package FOO::BAZ;
use strict;
#better hope the caller does not have a package namespace
$main::ExportedPackageName=__PACKAGE__;
sub routine {
print "Another message, this time from ".__PACKAGE__."!\n";
}
1;
Result:
c:\Perl>
c:\Perl>perl caller.pl
Current package=main
Make a call to mylibA.pl's &routine!
Package name exported=FOO::BAR
A message from FOO::BAR!
Make a call to mylibB.pl's &routine!
Package name exported=FOO::BAZ
Another message, this time from FOO::BAZ!
Normal Exit
Regarding the mostly academical problem of finding the package(s) in a perl source file:
You can try the CPAN module Module::Extract::Namespaces to get all packages within a perl file. It is using PPI and is thus not 100% perfect, but most of the time good enough:
perl -MModule::Extract::Namespaces -e 'warn join ",", Module::Extract::Namespaces->from_file(shift)' /path/to/foo.pm
But PPI can be slow for large files.
You can try to compare the active packages before and after the require. This is also not perfect, because if your perl library file loads additional modules then you cannot tell which is the package of the prinicipal file and what's loaded later. To get the list of packages you can use for example Devel::Symdump. Here's a sample script:
use Devel::Symdump;
my %before = map { ($_,1) } Devel::Symdump->rnew->packages;
require "/path/to/foo.pm";
my %after = map { ($_,1) } Devel::Symdump->rnew->packages;
delete $after{$_} for keys %before;
print join(",", keys %after), "\n";
You can also just parse the perl file for "package" declarations. Actually, that's what the PAUSE upload daemon is doing, so it's probably "good enough" for most cases. Look at the subroutine packages_per_pmfile in
https://github.com/andk/pause/blob/master/lib/PAUSE/pmfile.pm
There are two problems here:
How do I change the behaviour of a script when executed as a standalone and when used as a module?
How do I discover the package name of a piece of code I just compiled?
The general answer to question 2 is: You don't, as any compilation unit may contain an arbitrary number of packages.
Anyway, here are three possible solutions:
Name your modules so that you already know the name when you load it.
Have each module register itself at a central rendezvous point.
Like #1, but adds autodiscovery of your plugins.
The simplest solution is to put all of the API in an ordinary module, and put the standalone logic in a seperate script:
/the/location/
Module/
A.pm
B.pm
a-standalone.pl
b-standalone.pl
Where each standalone basically looks like
use Module::A;
Module::A->run();
If another script wants to reuse that code, it does
use lib "/the/location";
use Module::A;
...
If the loading happens on runtime, then Module::Runtime helps here:
use Module::Runtime 'use_module';
use lib "/the/location";
my $mod_a = use_module('Module::A');
$mod_a->run();
It isn't strictly necessary to place the contents of a-standalone.pl and Module/A.pm into separate files, although that is clearer. If you want to conditionally run code in a module only if it is used as a script, you can utilize the unless(caller) trick.
Of course all of this is tricksing: Here we determine the file name from the module name, not the other way round – which as I already mentioned we cannot do.
What we can do is have each module register itself at a certain predefined location, e.g. by
Rendezvous::Point->register(__FILE__ => __PACKAGE__);
Of course the standalone version has to shield against the possibility that there is no Rendezvous::Point, therefore:
if (my $register = Rendezvous::Point->can("register")) {
$register->(__FILE__ => __PACKAGE__);
}
Eh, this is silly and violates DRY. So let's create a Rendezvous::Point module that takes care of this:
In /the/location/Rendezvous/Point.pm:
package Rendezvous::Point;
use strict; use warnings;
my %modules_by_filename;
sub get {
my ($class, $name) = #_;
$modules_by_filename{$name};
}
sub register {
my ($file, $package) = #_;
$modules_by_filename{$file} = $package;
}
sub import {
my ($class) = #_;
$class->register(caller());
}
Now, use Rendezvous::Point; registers the calling package, and the module name can be retrived by the absolute path.
The script that wants to use the various modules now does:
use "/the/location";
use Rendezvous::Point (); # avoid registering ourself
my $prefix = "/the/location";
for my $filename (map "$prefix/$_", qw(Module/A.pm Module/B.pm)) {
require $filename;
my $module = Rendezvous::Point->get($filename)
// die "$filename didn't register itself at the Rendezvous::Point";
$module->run();
}
Then there are fully featured plugin systems like Module::Pluggable. This system works by looking at all paths were Perl modules may reside, and loads them if they have a certain prefix. A solution with that would look like:
/the/location/
MyClass.pm
MyClass/
Plugin/
A.pm
B.pm
a-standalone.pl
b-standalone.pl
Everything is just like with the first solution: Standalone scripts look like
use lib "/the/location/";
use MyClass::Plugin::A;
MyClass::Plugin::A->run;
But MyClass.pm looks like:
package MyClass;
use Module::Pluggable require => 1; # we can now query plugins like MyClass->plugins
sub run {
# Woo, magic! Works with inner packages as well!
for my $plugin (MyClass->plugins) {
$plugin->run();
}
}
Of course, this still requires a specific naming scheme, but it auto-discovers possible plugins.
As mentioned before it is not possible to look up the namespace of a 'required' package without extra I/O, guessing or assuming.
Like Rick said before, one have to intrude the namespace of the caller or better 'main'. I prefer to inject specific hooks within a BEGIN block of the 'required' package.
#VENDOR/App/SocketServer/Protocol/NTP.pm
package VENDOR::App::SocketServer::Protocol::NTP;
BEGIN {
no warnings;
*main::HANDLE_REQUEST = \&HANDLE_REQUEST;
}
sub HANDLE_REQUEST {
}
#VENDOR/App/SocketServer.pm
my $userPackage= $ARGV[0];
require $userPackage;
main::HANDLE_REQUEST();
Instead of *main:: you can get more specific with *main::HOOKS::HANDLE_REQUESTS i.e. This enables you to resolve all injected hooks easily within the caller by iterating over the HOOK's namespace portion.
foreach my $hooks( keys %main::HOOKS ) {
}
I'm working with WWW::Mechanize to automate web-based back office clicking I need to do to get my test e-commerce orders into the state I need them to be to test changes I have made to a particular part of a long, multi-part workflow. To process a lot of orders in a batch, I need to click the Home link often. To make that shorter, I hacked a method into WWW::Mechanize at run time like this (based on an example in Mastering Perl by brian d foy):
{ # Shortcut to go back to the home page by calling $mech->go_home
# I know I'll get a warning and do not want it!
no warnings 'once';
my $homeLink = $mech->find_link( text => 'Home' )->url_abs();
$homeLink =~ s/system=0/system=1/;
*WWW::Mechanize::go_home = sub {
my ($self) = #_;
return $self->get($homeLink);
};
}
This works great, and does not hurt anyone because the script I'm using it in is only used by me and is not part of the larger system.
But now I wonder if it is possible to actually only tell one $mech object that is has this method, while another WWW::Mechanize object that might be created later (to, say, do some cross-referencing without mixing up the other one that has an active session to my back office) cannot use that method.
I'm not sure if that is possible at all, since, if I understand the way objects work in Perl, the -> operator tells it to look for the subroutine go_home inside the package WWW::Mechanize and pass the $mech as the first argument to it. Please correct me if this understanding is wrong.
I've experimented by adding a sort of hard-coded check that only lets the original $mech object use the function.
my $onlyThisMechMayAccessThisMethod = "$mech";
my $homeLink = $mech->find_link( text => 'Home' )->url_abs();
$homeLink =~ s/system=0/system=1/;
*WWW::Mechanize::go_home = sub {
my ($self) = #_;
return undef unless $self eq $onlyThisMechMayAccessThisMethod;
return $self->get($homeLink);
};
Since "$mech" contains the address of where the data is stored (e.g. WWW::Mechanize=HASH(0x2fa25e8)), another object will look differently when stringified this way.
I am not convinced however that this is the way to go. So my question is: Is there a better way to only let one object of the WWW::Mechanize class have this method? I'm also glad about other suggestions regarding this code.
This is just
$mech->follow_link(text => 'Home')
and I don't think it's special enough to warrant a method of its own, or to need restricting to an exclusive club of objects.
It's also worth noting that there is no need to mess with typeglobs to declare a subroutine in a different package. You just have to write, for example
sub WWW::Mechanize::go_home {
my ($self) = #_;
return $self->get($homeLink);
};
But the general solution is to subclass WWW::Mechanize and declare as members only those objects you want to have the new method.
File MyMechanize.pm
package MyMechanize;
use strict;
use warnings;
use parent 'WWW::Mechanize';
sub go_home {
my $self = shift;
my $homeLink = $self->find_link(text => 'Home')->url_abs;
$homeLink =~ s/system=0/system=1/;
return $self->get($homeLink);
}
1;
File test.pl
use strict;
use warnings;
use MyMechanize;
my $mech = MyMechanize->new;
$mech->get('http://mydomain.com/path/to/site/page.html')
$mech->go_home;
#usr/bin/perl
use Plucene::Document;
use Plucene::Document::Field;
use Plucene::Index::Writer;
use Plucene::Analysis::SimpleAnalyzer;
use Plucene::Search::HitCollector;
use Plucene::Search::IndexSearcher;
use Plucene::QueryParser;
my $content = "I am the law";
my $doc = Plucene::Document->new;
$doc->add(Plucene::Document::Field->Text(content => $content));
$doc->add(Plucene::Document::Field->Text(author => "Philip Johnson"));
my $analyzer = Plucene::Analysis::SimpleAnalyzer->new();
my $writer = Plucene::Index::Writer->new("my_index", $analyzer, 1);
$writer->add_document($doc);
undef $writer; # close
my $searcher = Plucene::Search::IndexSearcher->new("my_index");
my #docs;
my $hc = Plucene::Search::HitCollector->new(collect => sub {
my ($self, $doc, $score) = #_;
push #docs, $searcher->doc($doc);
});
$searcher->search_hc($query => $hc);
Try as I may, I don't understand what this code does. I understand the familiar Perl syntax and what's going on on that end...but what is a Lucene Document, Index::Writer - etc.? Most importantly, when I run this code I expect something to be generated...yet I see nothing.
I know what an Analyzer is...thanks to this doc linked to in CPAN: http://onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2003/01/15/lucene.html?page=2. But I am just not getting why I run this code and it doesn't seem to DO anything...
Lucene is a search engine designed to search huge amounts of text very fast.
My perl is not strong, but from what I understand from Lucene objects:
my $content = "I am the law";
my $doc = Plucene::Document->new;
$doc->add(Plucene::Document::Field->Text(content => $content));
$doc->add(Plucene::Document::Field->Text(author => "Philip Johnson"));
This part creates a new document object and adds two text fields to it, content and author, in preparation to add it to an lucene index file as searchable data.
my $analyzer = Plucene::Analysis::SimpleAnalyzer->new();
my $writer = Plucene::Index::Writer->new("my_index", $analyzer, 1);
$writer->add_document($doc);
undef $writer; # close
This part creates the index files and adds the previously created document do that index. At this point, you should have a "my_index" folder with several index files in it, in your application directory, with docs's data in it as searchable text.
my $searcher = Plucene::Search::IndexSearcher->new("my_index");
my #docs;
my $hc = Plucene::Search::HitCollector->new(collect => sub {
my ($self, $doc, $score) = #_;
push #docs, $searcher->doc($doc);
});
$searcher->search_hc($query => $hc);
This part attempts to search the index file created above for the same document data you just used to create the index file. Presumably, you'll have your search results in #docs at this point, which you might want to display to user (tho it is not, in this sample).
This seems to be a "hello world" application for Lucene usage in perl. In real-life applications, I dont see a scenario where you would create the index file and then search it from same piece of code.
Where did you get this code from? It is a copy of the code in the Synopsis at the start of the Plucene POD documentation.
I guess it was an attempt by someone to begin learning about Plucene. The code in a module's synopsis isn't necessarily meant to achieve something useful on its own.
As the documentation you refer to says, Lucene is a Java library that adds text indexing and searching capabilities to an application. It is not a complete application that one can just download, install, and run.
Where did you get the idea that you should run the code you show?
I want to write a DBI wrapper, provide select/insert/update/delete, and users can choose which database to use. I'm very new to perl OO, I dont know what I'm doing right or not? Could you please review it, and tell me? And any advice is appreciated.
My wrapper directory look like:
MyDBI.pm
MyDBI/SQLite.pm
MyDBI/MySQL.pm
MyDBI.pm:
package MyDBI;
sub new {
shift; # discard parent class
my $database=shift || 'MySQL';
eval {
require "MyDBI/$database.pm";
} or die "$database not found\n";
my $self="MyDBI::$database"->new;
bless($self,"MyDBI::$database");
return $self;
}
sub insert { print "parent insert"; } # children will override it
MyDBI/MySQL.pm:
package MyDBI::MySQL;
require MyDBI;
#ISA=qw(MyDBI);
use DBI;use DBD::mysql;
sub new { #...} # not special
sub insert { print "mysql insert"; }
user script:
use MyDBI;
my $dbi=MyDBI->new('SQLite');
$dbi->insert;
Is this will work? MyDBI::new is different from perltoot, I'm not quite understand it right now, just copy and simulate it.
Thanks.
If you are looking for an ORM where the db tables and records map to objects and which offer data manipulation methods like insert, update and select, then see DBIx::Class or Rose::DB::Object. Each has its pros and cons, but Rose::DB::Object might be slightly easier to get started on.