Let's say I've findByName and findByWorkspace methods at my PostsRepository, it's a good practice to define a const object that will store a filter that will be used by both methods? Because both of them will filter posts for the user that's logged in.
Related
I have a database with 3 tables: product, category, and xref_product_category. My business logic permits a product to be associated with an arbitrary number of categories (bed, bath, kitchen, etc.). In terms of designing a REST API, what's the best way to establish these relationships?
For some reason I'm hesitant to pass a JSON array of category IDs as a parameter, but I don't really have a good reason not to. I suppose the other option would be to make a series of PUT calls, passing a single parameter each time. What's the most RESTful way to establish multiple relationships like this? Should this be done in a single API call, or in multiple calls?
In REST, the phrase "arbitrary number of parameters" usually means "representation".
The parameters as a whole could most likely be combined into payload content to represent a resource.
So firstly define the schema for the payload, and then you'll have a media type that can be used to represent it. Document the schema and tell the people who will use the API that they can POST or PUT with that content to define your product and its arbitrary relationships to other resources.
Then define the URI for your product resource and how clients will navigate to it from a Cool (entry-point) URI to it.
I would allow the parameters to be passing in any order.
A core piece of the application I'm working on is allowing the user to explore a complex dataset by progressively add search terms. For example, you might start with a free-text search, then progressively add (or remove) some facetted search terms, move a slider to constrain some dimension of the returned results, etc.
Conceptually, it seems to me that the user is incrementally defining a set of constraints. These constraints are used to search the dataset, and the rendering of the results provides the UI affordances to add further search refinements. So building this in Rails, I'm thinking of having one of the models be the current set of search constraints, and controller actions add to or remove constraint terms from this model.
Assuming this is a sensible approach (which is part of my question!), I'm not sure how to approach this in Rails, since the search is an ephemeral, not persistent, object. I could keep the constraints model in the session store, but it seems rather a complex object to be marshalled into a cookie. On the other hand, I could put store the constraints model in a database, but then I'll have a GC problem as the database fills up with constraint models from previous sessions.
So: how best to build up a complex interaction state in Rails?
Here's some pointers
create a class XxxSearch with accessors for all the search facets: keywords, category, tags, whatever. This class should be ActiveModel compatible, and it's instances are going to be used in conjunction with form_for #xxx_search. This class is not meant for persistence only for temporaryly holding search params and any associated logic. It may even act as a presenter for data: #xxx_search.results, or implement search data validations for each faceting step.
incrementaly resubmit the form via wizard technique, or even ad-hoc data insertion on a large form.
allways submit the search via GET, as such:
the search is bookmarkable
you can chain the params to pagination links easily like: params_for(params[:search].merge(:page => 3))
you need NOT use the session, the data is forwarded via GET params, as such:
can keep using cookie session store
escapes you from a lot of headaches when the last search is persisted and the user expects a new search context (I say this from experience)
I had to solve this problem for several apps so I wrote a small gem with a DSL to describe these searches:
https://github.com/fortytools/forty_facets
I have some basic objects like Customer, Portfolio and ... with some association to other objects. I can easily display the required information in the web page by reading object values. The problem is that what do I do when the value associated with the object is calculated and returned by a method, a value that makes sense only in certain context and cannot be attached to the object as an instance variable? In this case if I have a list of say Users I have to pass the username of each user to the method to get the calculated value. This causes problem to keep the association while displaying the values in the page.
An example to make this clear:
An application provides the functionality for users to keep track of each others activities by letting them add whoever they want to a list. If this user performs a search on users there's the option to follow each returned user. I want to make sure this option is disabled for those user's that are already being followed. This functionality is provided by a method like isFollowed(String follower, String followee) which returnes a boolean. How can I associate this boolean values to each user in search result?
Solutions:
One thing I can think of is to add a followed instance variable to User class. But I don't think it's a good approach because this variable only makes sense in a certain context. It's not a part of User class in the domain.
The other way I can think of is to use Decoration or Wrappers in a way to extend the User class and add the attribute in the child class. But again what if I have several objects that need to be in the same context. In that case I have to extend all of them with the same boolean attribute in all classes.
I hope I could make it clear.
In principle, I don't see anything wrong with instance method on User: bool IsFollowedBy(User user).
Of course, this could lead to performance issues. If that is the case, you can create separate object for presentation purposes which bundles data from User and whether he is being followed by the user performing search. Then you can build query which retrieves all necessary data for such object in a single roundtrip to DB.
One solution is to avoid querying Entities (as in DDD/ORM) and query directly using subquery/join or even using some denormalized database. This is something CQRS pattern suggests.
Other solution is to do computations on application layer (how many Users can you show on the same page anyway), which is expensive but you can implement some caching techniques to make things easier.
Let's say we have "User" and a "Hotel" model classes. I'd use a User_Mapper and Hotel_Mapper to load/save/delete etc. I want to then have the user be able to mark their "favourite" hotels. In the database I have my user_favourite_hotels table which is a simple link table along with say a field for subscribing to hotel updates.
When listing out the user's favourite hotels, how would you expect this to work from an API point of view? A part of me thinks that this should be a "findFavouritesByUserId" method on the Hotel_Mapper, but other than saying it "feels" right - however a colleague suggests that the "favourites" is owned by the user and should therefore be on the User_Mapper.
Perhaps I should have a User_Hotel_Favourites_Mapper? I was thinking of incorporating the "favourites" data in to the User object so it's saved and loaded whenever the User object is. I'm not sure whether it'd be better to split it out in to it's own object and mapper however.
I'd appreciate any advice on how best to setup the API for the above and any pros/cons/experiences.
Thanks very much,
James.
This (admittedly retired) patterns&practices guide to designing data tier components suggests that you put the method in the mapper of the type of object that you're getting back from the call.
If you have methods that return a particular type of business entity, place these methods in the Data Access Logic Component for that type. For example, if you are retrieving all orders for a customer, implement that function in the Order Data Access Logic Component because your return value is of the type Order. Conversely, if you are retrieving all customers that have ordered a specific product, implement that function in the Customer Data Access Logic Component.
So, in your example, it would go in the Hotel Mapper as it is returning Hotels.
If you want to store favorite hotels for the user, you are using the UserMapper, which notices that domain object for User has changes favorites, and updates both tables for users and for user_favorite_hotels ( you just need the hotel IDs ).
When you are retrieving favorite hotels of some user, you use HotelMapper and set filter to be based on User, because you will be working with instances of Hotel.
Considering that this was asked more than 2 years ago, I'm not sure if an answer matters to you now. But here's what I think anyway.
If User could have multiple types of favourites (including Hotels), it may make sense to have a UserFavourites abstraction to cover all possible types of favourites. UserFavourites could expose a getItems() method to get the underlying Favourites.
This could be managed with the help of a manager class to return the appropriate Favourites object(FavouriteHotels for example) on which the getItems() method can be called.
Struggling with a decision on how best to handle Client-level authentication with the following model hierarchy:
Client -> Store -> Product (Staff, EquipmentItem, etc.)
...where Client hasMany Stores, Store hasMany Products(hasMany Staff, hasMany EquipmentItem, etc.)
I've set up a HABTM relationship between User and Client, which is straightforward and accessible through the Auth session or a static method on the User model if necessary (see afterFind description below).
Right now, I'm waffling between evaluating the results in each model's afterFind callback, checking for relationship to Client based on the model I'm querying against the Clients that the current User is a member of. i.e. if the current model is Client, check the id; if the current model is a Store, check Store.clientid, and finally if Product, get parent Store from Item.storeid and check Store.clientid accordingly.
However, to keep in line with proper MVC, I return true or false from the afterFind, and then have to check the return from the calling action -- this is ok, but I have no way I can think of to determine if the Model->find (or Model->read, etc.) is returning false because of invalid id in the find or because of Client permissions in the afterFind; it also means I'd have to modify every action as well.
The other method I've been playing with is to evaluate the request in app_controller.beforeFilter and by breaking down the request into controller/action/id, I can then query the appropriate model(s) and eval the fields against the Auth.User.clients array to determine whether User has access to the requested Client. This seems ok, but doesn't leave me any way (afaik) to handle /controller/index -- it seems logical that the index results would reflect Client membership.
Flaws in both include a lengthy list of conditional "rules" I need to break down to determine where the current model/action/id is in the context of the client. All in all, both feel a little brittle and convoluted to me.
Is there a 3rd option I'm not looking at?
This sounds like a job for Cake ACL. It is a bit of a learning curve, but once you figure it out, this method is very powerful and flexible.
Cake's ACLs (Access Control Lists) allow you to match users to controllers down to the CRUD (Create Read Update Delete) level. Why use it?
1) The code is already there for you to use. The AuthComponent already has it built in.
2) It is powerful and integrated to allow you to control permissions every action in your site.
3) You will be able to find help from other cake developers who have already used it.
4) Once you get it setup the first time, it will be much easier and faster to implement full site permissions on any other application.
Here are a few links:
http://bakery.cakephp.org/articles/view/how-to-use-acl-in-1-2-x
http://book.cakephp.org/view/171/Access-Control-Lists
http://blog.jails.fr/cakephp/index.php?post/2007/08/15/AuthComponent-and-ACL
Or you could just google for CakePHP ACL