For an intranet application instead of using a proper web server, it has been planned to just deploy static html pages by sharing it over the network. This static html page is continously updated in the background by a program running on that PC and people access this html page by typing the shared file path directly in the browser. A maximum of 10 simultaneous users are expected to access it.
Can any one see the disadvantages or advantages in this type of deployment?
The problem is that this is what Web server side programming languages are designed to solve. One disadvantage is that this makes the process overly complicated. Web servers can be pretty light weight if the issue is not wanting extra administrative overhead. It sounds like you'd be writing a lot of data unnecessarily. I'd suggest using some Web based programming language/platform like PHP, Perl, ASP.NET, etc to just serve up content.
Related
I am new to REST and watched few videos and read few blogs on REST webservice and I came to know that generally people are using REST for supporting multiple devices like mobile and computer etc.
Now consider I am developing order management system and I want to support both computer as well as tablets. If in m traditional web application, I am using Spring MVC at front end, how REST will fit here so that it will support both the kind of devices.
One more doubt is, whatever examples I have browsed, it return html or json data. I want to develop the application the way spring MVC or struts works like returning name of jsp and jsp will be rendered with dynamic data (instead of returning string represented html).
I hope my question is clear. Please bear me as my questions are vague but I am looking from implementation and design point of view.
Just to start REST isn't anything to do with supporting mobile browsers. It is the architecture pattern HTTP follows. The Web had been REST since the early days.
I'm guessing what you mean is a server that returns light weight JSON that the client renders into HTML rather than the server returning HTML directly to browser. To do that you can use a java script framework that expects JSON data and that has a template engine to generate HTML on the fly in the browser. I think Anglar and Ember work like this.
Though I would only do this if you need to, and you don't need to do this just to support mobile browsers, you can support mobile just by making sure your CSS is responsive.
I own a Play 2.1 application.
Initially, I used the default template mechanisms from Play 2.1 until I .. learned AngularJS.
Now, I clearly want my client side to be an AngularJS app.
However, while surfing the net, I find there are no clear way to achieve it:
Letting Play behave as a simple RESTful application (deleting the view folder) and making a totally distinct project to build the view (AngularJS app initialized by grunt.js).
Advantage: Likely to be less messy, and front and backend teams would work easily separately.
Drawback: Need another HTTP server for the AngularJS app.
Try to totally integrate AngularJS app with the traditional Play's workflow.
Drawback: With a pretty complex framework like AngularJS, it would lead to a confusion of templates managementfor instance : scala.html (for Play) / tpl.html (for Angular) ... => messy.
Making a custom folder within the play project but distinct from the initial folders created by the Play scaffolding. Let's call it myangularview instead of traditional view for instance. Then, publish static contents generated by grunt.js into the Play's public folder, in order to be reachable from browser through Play's routing.
Advantage: SRP between components is still fairly respected and no need to use another light HTTP server for the client-side like in 1.
I pointed out my own views of advantage and drawbacks.
What would be a great way to achieve the combination of Play with Angular?
Yes, I'm answering to my own question :)
I came across this way of doing:
http://jeff.konowit.ch/posts/yeoman-rails-angular/
Rails?? No matter the framework is, the need remains exactly same.
It advocates a real separation between APIs (backend side), and front-end side (in this case making AJAX calls to backend server).
Thus, what I've learned is:
During development phase, a developer would use two servers: localhost on two distinct ports.
During production phase, the front-end elements would be encompassed into the whole backend side (the article would deal with a kind public folder, aiming to serve static contents: HTML, angular templates (for instance), CSS etc... Advantage? => dealing with a one and unique serving server's APIs exposition as well as static assets for the UI.
With this organization, some tools like Yeoman would be able to bring some really awesome handy things to developers like for instance: the livereload feature. :):)
Of course, during development phase, we end up with two different domains, (localhost:3000 and localhost:9000 for instance) causing issues for traditional ajax requests. Then, as the article points out, a proxy may be really useful.
I really find this whole practice very elegant and pleasant to work with.
There was an interesting discussion on the play mailinglist a couple of days ago about frontend-stack/solution, could be something in it for you, quite some people using angular it seems: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/play-framework/frontend/play-framework/IKdOowvRH0s/tQsD9zp--5oJ
Using Google App Engine SDK:
webpage: http://hwsejk.appspot.com/
I'm trying to make a web server using java and jsp (it is a web server for an iPhone application). I don't know a lot about java so I'm having a lot of troubles trying to construct a server by myself. For now, I have tried implementing cookie, database, and some other methods. Now that I've given you basic information about my web server, I have a few questions to ask.
Is it the right approach to use java and jsp to make a web server like this? the java servlets get and send user inputs to different jsp pages, which contain some HTML and java code. But I've found some posts here that it's a bad practice to use jsp like this. I don't know how else I can make webpages. Could anyone please recommend the right approach to make a web server (like the one linked above)? I would love to know if there is some kind of a template that I can take a look at.
What you are making doesnt seem to be a "server" at all but rather a "web application" or "web site". The former implies you are creating a piece of sfotware to implement a specific protocol like HTTP, FTP, etc. while the latter is making a series of web pages or and application that runs on server.
You can create a web application in any number of languages, not just Java. From the screenshot you shared i would think that using Rails (Ruby), Django (Paython), or Symfony2 (PHP) would probably get you up and running pretty fast as it looks like you dont need much more than some basic model scaffolding with a pretty face.
If you are familiar with Java you might also want to try the Play! framework...
I am in the process of scoping the development of an iPhone app for a client. Among other things, the app will allow users to browse through and place orders on specific (tangible) products.
The client has a website that currently does a similar thing and due to their limited budget and the fact that the website runs on a third-party proprietary platform which they have no control over, we are investigating possible alternatives to building a web service.
On the website, user registration and authentication, as well as order placing is done through POST requests via secure HTTP. The response is always a formatted HTML page which will contain strings indicating whether the request was successful or not, and if there was an error, what the error is etc.
So provided I can replicate the POST requests on the phone, and parse the HTML responses to read the results of each request, do you think this is an acceptable alternative to building a web service to handle this?
Apart from the possibility of pages changing (which we can manage) and the fact that I will probably have to download and parse a relatively large HTML response, are there any other drawbacks to this solution and is there anything else that I might be missing?
Many thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Cheers,
Rog
You could create an intermediary server that will communicate with the client server, and on it expose some REST web services with json (small overhead and easy to handle) responses that will be consumed by the iPhone app.
So, you're going to parse HTML and formulate POSTs off a third-party server, and pray that they don't even so much as rename a form field.
Your question is in two parts:
Do I think that a miracle is an acceptable solution? I don't.
Do I think that aside from the fact a miracle is required, are there any other drawbacks? None that I can think of.
You didn't ask, but this is a terrible course of action. Two suggestions.
I spy an assumption that the providers of the third-party platform aren't interested in enabling third-party applications by providing an API. They have a very good business reason for this, which is that it promotes platform lock-in. Reach out to their support department and have a talk with them.
You have to sell the client on building an intermediary web service. To at least try to mitigate the damage that changes on this third-party platform can do to your app, I recommend that you build and operate a proxy that receives requests from your applications, and proxies them over to the third-party platform. You should build into this client-server protocol a means for returning "we are in maintenance mode, go away" messages to apps, for that inevitable day when the third-party server changes something that breaks your app (they swapped the billing and shipping address pages, for instance) and you have to rush through an update through Apple to deal with it.
The proxy could be written in something more flexible and easy to bash stuff out in, such as PHP, Python, Perl, or Ruby. It could be hosted at Amazon in a micro instance.
p.s. This question is inappropriately tagged objective C.
HTML is the worst because of parsing (1-2secs per page), memory, and changes, but you already know that. Check in advance that ALL the data you need is exposed on the HTML.
If you use an intermediary server you are moving work elsewhere and you have another server to maintain. I would only do that if memory is an issue. Check How To Choose The Best XML Parser for Your iPhone Project for memory/performance/xpath support. libxml2 is a good option, but it depends on your needs. And maybe you'll want to check ASIHTTPRequest features before using the SDK.
I think utilising the web language of JSON would contribute to the diminishing of the parsing time. By building a REST service that, when sent a GET request, returns the correct information for easy sorting, you could then display the output a lot faster than that of parsing straight HTML.
I prefer JSON over XML, but everyone has their personal preference. You should look at a few very good libraries that are built specifically for parsing purposes of both XML and JSON.
For XML I recommend using the inbuilt libxml parser. Albeit, this can sometimes deem very difficult to use. A simple Google search will bring up a heap of results that relate specifically to what parser should be used depending on what task is to be completed.
As for a JSON parser, I recommend SBJSON. I am currently using it one of the biggest projects I have undertaken and it is definitely working perfectly for my use.
If you need a good way to connect to a RESTful web service, you should try LRResty.
Don't go for a parsing solution on the iPhone for 4 reasons:
Server can change their design and break your application (AppStore submition is long) + They can also detect that the request are sent from an application based on user agent which you have to update the application to change it.
Some of the requests might be made thru Javascript so you not only have to parse (X)HTML but also Javascript request (which can be in the form of XMLHttpRequest, but don't have to)
Long term evolution of the mobile market : maybe your client want (or will want) an application for android, Blackberry, Bada OS (Samsung), Symbian (Nokia/ OVIStore), Java Mobile or Windows Phone 7?
Of course network traffic, Memory and CPU needed to parse HTML (look the time it takes to the browser to do it?)
Regarding the traffic, if the application will not have a huge traffic you can home-host your proxy. Or you can find some provider to host it for you. I guess you won't need more than a couple of Megabytes of storage but maybe traffic. For less than 100€/year you can find some with unlimited traffic (like OVH Pro plan or Infomaniak). But if you want to go Java have a look at Google App Engine : you pay only if your traffic is important and if your application generate many CPU Cycles. If not : you don't have to pay. And it's hosted on Google server : reliable.
If the client is open, you could consider the paypal API.
I am working on a experimental website (which is accessible through web browser) that will act as a front-end to a restful interface (a sub-system). The website will serve as an interface between a user and the restful interface, as it will make http requests to the restful interface for almost all database operations. Authentication will probably be done using openid and authorization for the database operations will be done via oAuth.
Just out of curiousity, is this a feasible solution or I should develop two systems that accesses the database in parallel (i.e. the website has its own data access logic, and the restful interface has another data access logic)? And what are the pros/cons if I insist on doing it this way (it is just an experiment project for me to learn things like how OpenID and oAuth work in real life anyway) besides there will be more database queries and http requests generated for each transaction?
Your concept sounds quite feasible. I'd say that you'll get some fairly good wins out of this approach. For starters you'll get a large degree of code reuse since you'll be able to put other front ends on top of the RESTful service. Additionally, you'll be able to unit test this architecture with relative ease. Finally, you'll be able to give 3rd party developers access to the same API that you use (subject possibly to some restrictions) which will be a huge win when it comes to attracting customers and developers to your platform.
On the down side, depending on how you structure your back end you could run into the standard problem of granularity. Too much granularity and you'll end up making lots of connections for very little amounts of data. Too little and you'll get more data than you need in some cases. As for security, you should be able to lock down the back end so that requests can only be made under certain conditions: requests contain an authorization token, api key, etc.
Sounds good, but I'd recommend that you do this only if you plan to open up the restful API for other UI's to use, or simply to learn something cool. Support HTML XML and JSON for the interface.
Otherwise, use a great MVC framework instead (asp.net MVC, rails, cakephp). You'll end up with the same basic result but you'll be "strongerly" typed to the database.
with a modern javascript library your approach is quite straightforward.
ExtJS now has always had Ajax support, but it is now able to do this via a REST interface.
So, your ExtJS user interface components populate receive a URL. They populate themselves via a GET to the URL, and store update via POST to the URL.
This has worked really well on a project I'm currently working on. By applying RESTful principles there's an almost clinical separation between the front & backends - meaning it would be trivial undertaking to replace other. Plus, the API barely needs documenting, since it's an implementation of an existing mature standard.
Good luck,
Ian
woow! A question from 2009! And it's funny to read the answers. Many people seem to disagree with the web services approach and JS front end - which has nowadays become kind of standard, known as Single Page Applications..
I think the general approach you outline is quite feasible -- the main pro is flexibility, the main con is that it won't protect clueless users against their own ((expletive deleted)) abuses. As most users are likely to be clueless, this isn't feasible for mass consumption... but, it's fine for really leet users!-)
So to clarify, you want to have your web UI call into your web service, which in turn calls into the database?
This is exactly the path I took for a recent project and I think it was a mistake because you end up creating a lot of extra work. Here's why:
When you are coding your web service, you will create a library to wrap database calls, which is typical. No problem there.
But then when you code your web UI, you will end up creating another library to wrap calls into the REST interface... because otherwise it will get cumbersome making all the raw HTTP calls.
So you essentially created 2 data access libraries, one to wrap DB and the other to wrap the Web service calls. This basically doubles the amount of work you do, because for every operation on a resource, you will end up implementing in both libraries. This gets tiring real fast.
The simpler alternative is to create a single library that wraps access to the database, as before, then use that library from BOTH the web UI and web service.
This is assuming that your web UI and web service reside on the same network and both have direct access to the backend database server (which was the case for me). In this setup having both go directly to the database is also a lot more efficient then having the UI go through the web service.