I have some global variables $$A, $$B, $$C and what to search within a table for these terms in fieldA, fieldB and fieldC (using Perform Find). How can I use the result of this Perform Find to display the results in a portal.
The implementation by my predecessor replaces a field fieldSEARCHwith 1 if it is in the Perform Find results and 0 otherwise, and then uses a portal filtered by this field. This seems a very dodgey way of doing it, not least becuase it means that multiple users will not be able to search at the same time!
Can you enhance the portal filter to filter against the variables themselves? Or you can perform the find, grab IDs of the found set, put them into a global field, and then use the field to construct the relationship. Global fields are multi-user safe.
The best way is not to do this at all, but use list views to perform searches. List views are naturally searchable and much more flexible than portals (you can easily sort them, omit arbitrary records, and so on). It's possible to repeat this functionality in portals, but it's way more complex. I mean, if there's some serious gain from using a portal, then it's doable, but if not, then the native way is obviously better.
List views are easier to search, as FileMaker still hasn't transitioned to the 21st century and insists on this model... Most users however want a Master-Detail view, like a mail app, and understandably so as it's more intuitive (i.e. produce a list view on one side, but clicking on it updates detail/fields in the middle).
If this is what you want, you may want to cast an eye at Modular FM, where someone has already done the hard work for you:
http://www.modularfilemaker.org/module/masterdetail-2-0/
HTH
Stam
Related
I'm having some issues to correctly design the domain that I'm working on.
My straightforward use case is the following:
The user (~5000 users) can access to a list of ads (~5 millions)
He can choose to add/remove some of them as favorites.
He can decide to show/hide some of them.
I have a command which will mutate the aggregate state, to set Favorite to TRUE, let's say.
In terms of DDD, how should I design the aggregates?
How design the relationship between a user and his favorite's ads selection?
Considering the large numbers of ads, I cannot duplicate each ad inside a user aggregate root.
Can I design a Ads aggregateRoot containing a user "collection".
And finally, how to handle/perform the readmodels part?
Thanks in advance
Cheers
Two concepts may help you understand how to model this:
1. Aggregates are Transaction Boundaries.
An aggregate is a cluster of associated objects that are considered as a single unit. All parts of the aggregate are loaded and persisted together.
If you have an aggregate that encloses a 1000 entities, then you have to load all of them into memory. So it follows that you should preferably have small aggregates whenever possible.
2. Aggregates are Distinct Concepts.
An Aggregate represents a distinct concept in the domain. Behavior associated with more than one Aggregate (like Favoriting, in your case) is usually an aggregate by itself with its own set of attributes, domain objects, and behavior.
From your example, User is a clear aggregate.
An Ad has a distinct concept associated with it in the domain, so it is an aggregate too. There may be other entities that will be embedded within the Ad like valid_until, description, is_active, etc.
The concept of a favoriting an Ad links the User and the Ad aggregates. Your question seems to be centered around where this linkage should be preserved. Should it be in the User aggregate (a list of Ads), or should an Ad have a collection of User objects embedded within it?
While both are possibilities, IMHO, I think FavoriteAd is yet another aggregate, which holds references to both the User aggregate and the Ad aggregate. This way, you don't burden the concepts of User or the Ad with favoriting behavior.
Those aggregates will also not be required to load this additional data every time they are loaded into memory. For example, if you are loading an Ad object to edit its contents, you don't want the favorites collection to be loaded into memory by default.
These aggregate structures don't matter as far as read models are concerned. Aggregates only deal with the write side of the domain. You are free to rewire the data any way you want, in multiple forms, on the read side. You can have a subscriber just to listen to the Favorited event (raised after processing the Favorite command) and build a composite data structure containing data from both the User and the Ad aggregates.
I really like the answer given by Subhash Bhushan and I want to add another approach for you to consider.
If you look closely at your question you will see that you've made the assumption that an aggregate can 'see' everything that the user does when they are interacting with the UI. This doesn't need to be so.
Depending on the requirements of the domain you don't need to hold a list of any Ads in the aggregate to favourite them. Here's what I mean:
For this example, it doesn't matter where the the 'favourite' ad command sits. It could be on the user aggregate or a specific aggregate for handling the concept of Favouriting. The command just needs to hold the id of the User and the Ad they are favouriting.
You may need to handle what happens if a user or ad is deleted but that would just be a case of an event process manager listening to the appropriate events and issuing compensating commands.
This way you don't need to load up 5 million ads. That's a job for the read model and UI, not the domain.
Just a thought.
I have a database of million of Objects (simply say lot of objects). Everyday i will present to my users 3 selected objects, and like with tinder they can swipe left to say they don't like or swipe right to say they like it.
I select each objects based on their location (more closest to the user are selected first) and also based on few user settings.
I m under mongoDB.
now the problem, how to implement the database in the way it's can provide fastly everyday a selection of object to show to the end user (and skip all the object he already swipe).
Well, considering you have made your choice of using MongoDB, you will have to maintain multiple collections. One is your main collection, and you will have to maintain user specific collections which hold user data, say the document ids the user has swiped. Then, when you want to fetch data, you might want to do a setDifference aggregation. SetDifference does this:
Takes two sets and returns an array containing the elements that only
exist in the first set; i.e. performs a relative complement of the
second set relative to the first.
Now how performant this is would depend on the size of your sets and the overall scale.
EDIT
I agree with your comment that this is not a scalable solution.
Solution 2:
One solution I could think of is to use a graph based solution, like Neo4j. You could represent all your 1M objects and all your user objects as nodes and have relationships between users and objects that he has swiped. Your query would be to return a list of all objects the user is not connected to.
You cannot shard a graph, which brings up scaling challenges. Graph based solutions require that the entire graph be in memory. So the feasibility of this solution depends on you.
Solution 3:
Use MySQL. Have 2 tables, one being the objects table and the other being (uid-viewed_object) mapping. A join would solve your problem. Joins work well for the longest time, till you hit a scale. So I don't think is a bad starting point.
Solution 4:
Use Bloom filters. Your problem eventually boils down to a set membership problem. Give a set of ids, check if its part of another set. A Bloom filter is a probabilistic data structure which answers set membership. They are super small and super efficient. But ya, its probabilistic though, false negatives will never happen, but false positives can. So thats a trade off. Check out this for how its used : http://blog.vawter.com/2016/03/17/Using-Bloomfilters-to-Avoid-Repetition/
Ill update the answer if I can think of something else.
Is it possible to create a static sidebar on the left-hand-side of a list view in Filemaker?
I was hoping to have editable search criteria on the left and a list on the right.
No, not in list view, although you can achieve that UI with a portal. There are a lot of ways to populate the portal based on the search criteria - you can build a complex self-join relationship, use portal filtering (which is the easiest way, but will be slow for large numbers of records), or do either a scripted find in another window (slower but easy to program) or an SQL query (faster but requires a plugin and harder to program) and populate a global field with the IDs of the matching records and do a join based on that.
I have read about the Aggregate Pattern but I'm confused about something here. The pattern states that all the objects belonging to the aggregate should be accessed via the Aggregate Root, and not directly.
And I'm assuming that is the reason why they say you should have a single Repository per Aggregate.
But I think this adds a noticeable overhead to the application. For example, in a typical Web-based application, what if I want to get an object belonging to an aggregate (which is NOT the aggregate root)? I'll have to call Repository.GetAggregateRootObject(), which loads the aggregate root and all its child objects, and then iterate through the child objects to find the one I'm looking for. In other words, I'm loading lots of data and throwing them out except the particular object I'm looking for.
Is there something I'm missing here?
PS: I know some of you may suggest that we can improve performance with Lazy Loading. But that's not what I'm asking here... The aggregate pattern requires that all objects belonging to the aggregate be loaded together, so we can enforce business rules.
I'm not sure where you read about this "Aggregate Pattern". Please post a link.
One thing it could be is where we encapsulate a list into another object. For a simple example if we have a shopping cart instead of passing around a list of purchases we use a cart object instead. Then code that works on the whole cart (eg. getting total spend) can be encapsulated in the cart. I'm not sure if this is really a pattern but google found this link: http://perldesignpatterns.com/?AggregatePattern
I suspect when you say
"The aggregate pattern requires that
all objects belonging to the aggregate
be loaded together, so we can enforce
business rules. "
this depends on your business rules.
Generally patterns should not be regarded as a set of rules you must follow for everything. It is up to you as a developer to recognise where they can be used effectively.
In our cart example we would generally want to work on the whole cart at once. We might have business rules that say our customers can only order a limited about of items - or maybe they get a discount for order multiple items. So it makes sense to read the whole thing.
If you take a different example eg. products. You could still have a products repository but you needn't not load them all at once. You probably only ever want a page of products at a time.
i have a decent understanding of configuring drupal and using modules for basic stuff, but just getting into module development and overriding functions and stuff due to my very basic understanding of php and mysql.
i have a custom content type ('books') and a 3 cck field for genres (primary, secondary, tertiary). i'd like a user to be able to filter a view of all books with one exposed multi-selectable 'genre' filter. that's where i'm stuck-- i understand how to have three exposed filters for the 3 genre 'weights' (primary, secondary, tertiary)--i want one filter that would allow users to select any or all of those weights.
is a custom search form my only option? was there a better way to set things up? would i have been better off using one cck field for 'genres' with multiple entries? i ruled this out because i thought it would be harder to determine the genre 'weight' (primary, secondary, tertiary).
thanks a million.
Think about what the meaning of genres to a book is. Taxonomy is just what you use for this kind of thing. There are several pros using the taxonomy rather than using CCK fields.
Taxonomy is meta data, CCK fields are not. This mean that the way the html is generated for taxonomy terms, it will help SE to understand that these genres are important and it will give you a free SEO
You can setup how genres should be selected in far more detail than a CCK field. Again since taxonomy is made for exactly this kind of thing. You can setup how users are presentated with the genre selection in various ways. You can predefine genres or let users enter their own as they like. You can make child-parent relation ships and more
It's easier and more lightweight to use taxonomy than CCK fields.
If there only is 1 or 2 genre inputted you wont have to have empty CCK fields.
probably more that I can't think of right now
Using taxonomy you can pretty easily make a search with views, where you make it possible for users to select genres using a multiple select list. You can decide if you require all terms or only one of them. Simply put you should really use taxonomy, it should solve all of your problems, if not, you should still use it and try to solve the problems you could get using taxonomy instead of CCK fields.
Jergason has a good point saying that taxonomy would probably be a good fit for your fields. However this wouldn't solve your problem of weighted genres.
A possible (though hacky) solution would be to have a fourth field which combined the values of the other three which is only set when a node is saved. This field could then be used for searching.
The non hacky solution is to write your own views filter but this is very advanced.
There may be a way to do this with views out of the box it is flexible, hopefully someone else knows of an easier non hacky solution.