I'm building a simple framework and hoping it will help me better understand OOP. Well, I've come across my first hurdle.
I'm naturally using MVC pattern and I have a user model. I then have a 'table' which manages the collection of user objects. I have an abstract model and table. Similar to Zend Framework layout.
Anyway, I'm now wondering what is the best way to execute a query? I have a database object which manages the database layer. Currently using mysqli object.
Trouble is my connection is a member of my application object, how do I access that from within my table object to execute a query? I obviously can't create a new object because that will connect to the database again. I need to reuse this same db object.
Any ideas? I understand if this isn't optimal design. Right now I'm just looking for advice.
Edit: Should I just use Doctrine?
doctrine or not?
If your intention is to learn how to write SQL Queries and to create something for your own, use mysqli or PDO.
If you would like to learn how to use a real object oriented database layer, use doctrine. With 3 pages tutorial, you can do the most general things. However some very special cases are better coded in raw sql than with doctrine. But if you know how to do things with doctrine it is a very useful library and you end up writing better, consistenter, more readabler and extensiabler (:-)) code.
you should add such dependencies in constructor.
You are able to use a static db object too, but especially for a framework like project this will get you to hell, if you try to add unit-tests or you want to refactor.
In named Patterns, you want to use dependency injection for this
Related
I have legacy code that has DB connected.I'm trying to add new features for this app with Symfony2. I used Theodo Evolution Bundle to access the legacy session.
First thing that I want to do now, is to build an API that will use data from existing database. This database has tables that are not converted to entities. My question is which is best approach in this case. To use native queries from existing tables in database to build API or to convert tables into entities I used documentation for this part but I'm not sure will import all relations and everything) and then to build API. Can you please suggest me which is best approach in this case. Thank you.
The best approach in my opinion is to work with doctrine entities within the framework and to avoid direct SQL if possible. That is the basic philosophy behind frameworks such as Symfony: the database layer should be abstracted.
The entity-database mapping might be quite more of a hassle at first, because you can't rely on automatic tools to set it up, but once it's done it will be much easier to work out the rest of the application.
Today I was checking out a few technologies: T4 templating, automapper
some mini orms: petapoco, sqlfu, ormlite
I understand the gist of what these technologies provide. I'm currently working on a 3 tier system, and I would have loved to replace the DAL (data access layer located on it's own data server) and have it integrated with a mini ORM as shown. However, I will be making no such plans for now. We currently use .NET Remoting (predates WCF).
So instead of replacing whatever is on the DataServer, I'd like to extend one of these new technologies on the application server.
I've done research on how Entity Framework can automatically generate POCO classes based on the context, which is done manually after building EF, I was wondering if I can do the same without using EF.
So here's the facts on what's currently happening:
Send a sql statement (or stored proc) to the DAL to execute
Retrieves a DataSet or a DataTable back to the application through TCP channel
My question is, is it possible to automatically generate a dynamic POCO class using keywords "var" and "dynamic" based on the values sent back from the DataSet and do dynamic mapping onto it during runtime? Would any of the technologies mentioned above help? Or do I have to manually create the POCO class first, and do a mapping on it?
It seems a bit redundant for me to manually create a POCO class and map it to a backend sql table if the application could be aware of what the POCO class is supposed to have. Like what happens if I update a table on the backend, then I'd have to update the POCO class associated with it as well. I'd love to have this to be automatic for me.
If you know the data sets at compile time, then T4 might be an option. You can write a T4 script that downloads the database schema, and constructs strongly-typed entity classes and database reads/write methods.
As far late-bound (runtime) classes, one option is to use the runtime typing provided by CustomTypeDescriptor. You can pass arrays of objects back and forth from the server, and use reflection or other techniques to infer the type.
I think it should be clear that #1 is preferable, if you know the types at compile time (which it sounds like in your case here). Runtime and dynamic should only be a last resort, as it circumvents a lot of valuable compile-time type checks.
Really, I would recommend using one of the micro ORMs like Dapper, etc, if you don't want to use the full Entity Framework. That is, unless you really want to re-invent the wheel.
We have been suggested to use NHibernate for our project. But the point is our application will only be retrieving the data from the database so are there any benefits of using NHibernate in this scenario?
One more thing, what is the query execution plan in NHIbernate does it support something like prepared statements or the so called pre complied statements.?
I agree to the answers above, but there is one more reason for using nhibernate: Your completely independend of the underlaying database system. You can switch from mysql to oracle and the only thing you have to do, is to change the settings. the access to the database stays exactly the same.
NHibernate is useful is you need to map data from a database table into a .NET class. Even if you're only doing select queries, it still might be useful if you need to pass the data objects to a client tier (web page, desktop app, etc.) for display. Working with plain objects can be easier than working with a DataSet or other ADO.NET data class in a presentation layer.
NHibernate does have the ability to parse/pre-compile queries if you put them in the mapping file.
The benefit for using NHibernate in a read only scenario is that you would not need to map the results of queries back to .net objects as the runtime would do this for you. Also, it provides a more object oriented query syntax (you can also use LINQ), and you can take advantage of lazy loading.
I don't believe NHibernate can use prepared statements unless you are having it call stored procedures.
So I'm having a head against the wall moment and hoping somebody can come help either remove the wall or stop my head from moving!!
Over the last 3/4 weeks I've been investigating ORM's in readyness for a new project. The ORM must map to an existing, large and ageing SQL database.
So I tried Subsonic. I really liked v2 and v3 after modding to work nicely with VB and named schemas in SQL was running OK. However, its lack of flexibility of having separate entity properties names vs column names had me pulling my hair out (sorry Rob).
I tried Entity Framework but I found like others it lacking in certain areas.
So I bit the bullet and tried nHibernate but after a week or so getting it working how I liked (with help from Codesmith to generate classes/hbms for me) I'm frustrated with the time it takes to startup (build a config object), despite trying a number of tricks to reduce this time.
I'm essentially after building a DAL class that I can share between apps and websites. Am I barking up the wrong tree? For a legacy project with 100s of tables should I go back to ado.net and use DTOs? Aarrgh!
Sorry for the ranty style of question. I don't have much hair left and I'd like to keep what I have!!
Thanks in advance, Ed
PS. I should add that I know SQL very well and not scared of getting my hands dirty to write fast queries. If anything I don't need to be hid from SQL
ORM let's you:
To map table rows to objects, that are the the workable pieces of object oriented programming.
To automatically navigate through object relationships
To easily add, edit and remove table rows
To query the database in a more intuitive way as you don't have to think of joins (this one will depend on the ORM and the query method)
To transparently handle L1 and L2 cache.
All of the above would have to be handled by hand if you werent using ORM.
PS: I agree to Dmitry as to the startup time of NHibernate (see question comments). Besides, did you try Fluent NHibernate? Fluent NHibernate is impressively easy. I couldn't believe my eyes when I first mapped a database. It's even easier than proprietary ORMs like DevExpress XPO.
The biggest benefit of an ORM tool is that it will help you layer your application correctly. Most project nowadays use a Data Layer to connect to the database. You start from the ORM tool to produce classes that correspond to your database objects. Then you define an interface using these methods. All persistence code uses the methods of this interface. This way the business logic layer is only coupled to this higher-layer interface and needs to know nothing about the database. In fact there should be no dependency on ADO.NET or even NHibernate.
Another advantage of ORM tools is that you de-couple your application from the database server. You could change the db engine and still use the same code. Also there isn't only the complexity of the SQL that the ORM hides from you. It can also help you with transactions logic and connection pooling.
I'd say that for new projects an ORM tool is a necessity. For legacy projects it isn't so much beneficial, unless of course you have the time/money to start from scratch.
In my experience, most ORMs end up being way more complex than SQL. Which defeats the entire purpose of using them.
One solution I'm enthusiastic about is LINQ2SQL. It excels as a thin layer about stored procedures or views. It's really easy to use and doesn't try to hide SQL.
There are basically two questions here:
What's great about ORMs? There are similar questions on Stackoverflow. See:
What are the advantages of using an ORM?
Is everyone here jumping on the ORM band wagon?
How can I improve NHibernate startup time? See:
http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2007/10/26/Real-World-NHibernate-Reducing-startup-times-for-large-amount-of.aspx
http://nhforge.org/blogs/nhibernate/archive/2009/03/13/an-improvement-on-sessionfactory-initialization.aspx
I am putting some heavy though into re-writing the data access layer in my software(If you could even call it that). This was really my first project that uses, and things were done in an improper manner.
In my project all of the data that is being pulled is being stored in an arraylist. some of the data is converted from the arraylist into an typed object, before being put backinto an arraylist.
Also, there is no central set of queries in the application. This means that some queries are copy and pasted, which I want to eliminate as well.This application has some custom objects that are very standard to the application, and some queries that are very standard to those objects.
I am really just not sure if I should create a layer between my objects and the class that reads and writes to the database. This layer would take the data that comes from the database, type it as the proper object, and if there is a case of multiple objects being returned, return a list of those object. Is this a good approach?
Also, if this is a good way of doing things, how should I return the data from the database? I am currently using SqlDataReader.read, and filling an array list. I am sure that this is not the best method to use here, i am just not real clear on how to improve this.
The Reason for all of this, is I want to centralize all of the database operations into a few classes, rather than have them spread out amongst all of the classes in the project
You should use an ORM. "Not doing so is stealing from your customers" - Ayende
One thing comes to mind right off the bat. Is there a reason you use ArrayLists instead of generics? If you're using .NET 1.1 I could understand, but it seems that one area where you could gain performance is to remove ArrayLists from the picture and stop converting and casting between types.
Another thing you might think about which can help a lot when designing data access layers is an ORM. NHibernate and LINQ to SQL do this very well. In general, the N-tier approach works well for what it seems like you're trying to accomplish. For example, performing data access in a class library with specific methods that can be reused is far better than "copy-pasting" the same queries all over the place.
I hope this helps.
It really depends on what you are doing. If it is a growing application with user interfaces and the like, you're right, there are better ways.
I am currently developing in ASP.NET MVC, and I find Linq to SQL really comfortable. Linq to SQL uses code generation to create a collection of code classes that model your data.
ScottGu has a really nice introduction to Linq to SQL on his blog:
http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2007/05/19/using-linq-to-sql-part-1.aspx
I have over the past few projects used a base class which does all my ADO.NET work and that all other data access classes inherit. So my UserDB class will inherit the DataAccessBase class. I have it at the moment that my UserDB class actualy takes the data returned from the database and populates a User object which is then returned to the calling Business Object. If multiple objects are returned then these are then a Generic list ie List<Users> is returned.
There is a good article by Daemon Armstrong (search Google for Daemon Armstrong which demonstrates on how this can be achived.
""http://www.simple-talk.com/dotnet/.net-framework/.net-application-architecture-the-data-access-layer/""
However I have now started to move all of this over to use the entitty framework as its performs much better and saves on all those manual CRUD operations. Was going to use LINQ to SQL but as it seems to be going to be dead in the water very soon thought it would be best to invest my time in the next ORM.
"I am really just not sure if I should create a layer between my objects and the class that reads and writes to the database. This layer would take the data that comes from the database, type it as the proper object, and if there is a case of multiple objects being returned, return a list of those object. Is this a good approach?"
I'm a Java developer, but I believe that the language-agnostic answer is "yes".
Have a look at Martin Fowler's "Patterns Of Enterprise Application Architecture". I believe that technologies like LINQ were born for this.