I often get confused as to which model to create functions. Let me try to explain my current situation with a simple made up example:
I have a Log model that contains all activities on our app. I want to get the activity for a specific user. Should I create a getActivity($userId) function in the User model or the Log model?
Why not both?
Of course, the main thing is to avoid code duplication as this would be difficult to maintain - and an ugly solution.
The Log Model could contain a method called getActivity() which fetches all activity (or based on any arguments needed for pagination and/or log levels). Additionally, for self-documenting purposes, create a method called getUserActivity($userId) - a method that hopefully looks selfexplainatory.
The User Model could now contain a method called getActivity() (again, with any arguments needed for pagination and/or log levels) which in turn calls the getUserActivity() method in your Log model.
Is this the smartest choice?
Well, there is never a single solution for any problem - but what I like about this solution is that you now have the possibilty to seperate the logic for each of the models, but still have a visible and functional link between them. Secondly, you know have the possibilty to chain User objects to log activity in an easy way.
Since the main used database in your function will be the "Log" one, you should place it in the Log Model.
Related
I'm trying to understand the MVC pattern in Phalcon.
In my current application I only need ONE template file for each table. The template contains the datagrid, the SQL statement for the SELECT, the form, add/edit/delete-buttons, a search box and all things necessary to interact with the database, like connection information (of course using includes as much as possible to prevent duplicate code). (I wrote my own complex framework, which converts xml-templates into a complete HTML-page, including all generated Javascript-code and CSS, without any PHP needed for the business logic. Instead of having specific PHP classes for each table in the database, I only use standard operation-scripts and database-classes that can do everything). I'm trying to comply more with web standards though, so I'm investigating alternatives.
I tried the INVO example of Phalcon and noticed that the Companies-page needs a Companies model, a CompaniesController, a CompaniesForm and 4 different views. To me, compared to my single file template now, having so many different files is too confusing.
I agree that separating the presentation from the business logic makes sense, but I can't really understand why the model and controller need to be in separate classes. This only seems to make things more complicated. And it seems many people already are having trouble deciding what should be in the model and what should be in the controller anyway. For example validation sometimes is put in the model if it requires business logic, but otherwise in the controller, which seems quite complex.
I work in a small team only, so 'separation of concerns' (apart from the presentation and business logic) is not really the most important thing for us.
If I decide not to use separate model and controller classes,
what problems could I expect?
Phalcon's Phalcon\Mvc\Model class, which your models are supposed to extend, is designed to provide an object-oriented way of interacting with the database. For example, if your table is Shopping_Cart then you'd name your class ShoppingCart. If your table has a column "id" then you'd define a property in your class public $id;.
Phalcon also gives you methods like initialize() and beforeValidationOnCreate(). I will admit these methods can be very confusing regarding how they work and when they're ran and why you'd ever want to call it in the first place.
The initialize() is quite self-explanatory and is called whenever your class is initiated. Here you can do things like setSource if your table is named differently than your class or call methods like belongsTo and hasMany to define its relationship with other tables.
Relationship are useful since it makes it easy to do something like search for a product in a user's cart, then using the id, you'd get a reference to the Accounts table and finally grab the username of the seller of the item in the buyer's cart.
I mean, sure, you could do separate queries for this kind of stuff, but if you define the table relationships in the very beginning, why not?
In terms of what's the point of defining a dedicated model for each table in the database, you can define your own custom methods for managing the model. For example you might want to define a public function updateItemsInCart($productId,$quantity) method in your ShoppingCart class. Then the idea is whenever you need to interact with the ShoppingCart, you simply call this method and let the Model worry about the business logic. This is instead of writing some complex update query which would also work.
Yes, you can put this kind of stuff in your controller. But there's also a DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principle. The purpose of MVC is separation of concerns. So why follow MVC in the first place if you don't want a dedicated Models section? Well, perhaps you don't need one. Not every application requires a model. For example this code doesn't use any: https://github.com/phalcon/blog
Personally, after using Phalcon's Model structure for a while, I've started disliking their 1-tier approach to Models. I prefer multi-tier models more in the direction of entities, services, and repositories. You can find such code over here:
https://github.com/phalcon/mvc/tree/master/multiple-service-layer-model/apps/models
But such can become overkill very quickly and hard to manage due to using too much abstraction. A solution somewhere between the two is usually feasible.
But honestly, there's nothing wrong with using Phalcon's built-in database adapter for your queries. If you come across a query very difficult to write, nobody said that every one of your models needs to extend Phalcon\Mvc\Model. It's still perfectly sound logic to write something like:
$pdo = \Phalcon\DI::getDefault()->getDb()->prepare($sql);
foreach($params as $key => &$val)
{
$pdo->bindParam($key,$val);
}
$pdo->setFetchMode(PDO::FETCH_OBJ);
$pdo->execute();
$results=$pdo->fetchAll();
The models are very flexible, there's no "best" way to arrange them. The "whatever works" approach is fine. As well as the "I want my models to have a method for each operation I could possibly ever want".
I will admit that the invo and vokuro half-functional examples (built for demo purposes only) aren't so great for picking up good model designing habits. I'd advise finding a piece of software which is actually used in a serious manner, like the code for the forums: https://github.com/phalcon/forum/tree/master/app/models
Phalcon is still rather new of a framework to find good role models out there.
As you mention, regarding having all the models in one file, this is perfectly fine. Do note, as mentioned before, using setSource within initialize, you can name your classes differently than the table they're working on. You can also take advantage of namespaces and have the classes match the table names. You can take this a step further and create a single class for creating all your tables dynamically using setSource. That's assuming you want to use Phalcon's database adapter. There's nothing wrong with writing your own code on top of PDO or using another framework's database adapter out there.
As you say, separation of concerns isn't so important to you on a small team, so you can get away without a models directory. If it's any help, you could use something like what I wrote for your database adapter: http://pastie.org/10631358
then you'd toss that in your app/library directory. Load the component in your config like so:
$di->set('easySQL', function(){
return new EasySQL();
});
Then in your Basemodel you'd put:
public function easyQuery($sql,$params=array())
{
return $this->di->getEasySQL()->prepare($sql,$params)->execute()->fetchAll();
}
Finally, from a model, you can do something as simple as:
$this->easyQuery($sqlString,array(':id'=>$id));
Or define the function globally so your controllers can also use it, etc.
There's other ways to do it. Hopefully my "EasySQL" component brings you closer to your goal. Depending on your needs, maybe my "EasySQL" component is just the long way of writing:
$query = new \Phalcon\Mvc\Model\Query($sql, $di);
$matches=$query->execute($params);
If not, perhaps you're looking for something more in the direction of
$matches=MyModel::query()->where(...)->orderBy(...)->limit(...)->execute();
Which is perfectly fine.
Model, View and Controller were designed to separate each process.
Not just Phalcon uses this kind of approach, almost PHP Frameworks today uses that approach.
The Model should be the place where you're saving or updating things, it should not rely on other components but the database table itself (ONLY!), and you're just passing some boolean(if CRUD is done) or a database record query.
You could do that using your Controller, however if you'll be creating multiple controllers and you're doing the same process, it is much better to use 1 function from your model to call and to pass-in your data.
Also, Controllers supposed to be the script in the middle, it should be the one to dispatch every request, when saving records, when you need to use Model, if you need things to queue, you need to call some events, and lastly to respond using json response or showing your template adapter (volt).
We've shorten the word M-V-C, but in reality, we're processing these:
HTTP Request -> Services Loaded (including error handlers) -> The Router -> (Route Parser) -> (Dispatch to specified Controller) -> The Controller -> (Respond using JSON or Template Adapter | Call a Model | Call ACL | Call Event | Queue | API Request | etc....) -> end.
there are cases when i require to run the same logic both in controller and view, i thought they may have a shared code, for example when to display an edit link and the same logic should check for edit permission in controller , where should i keep such code so that same can be used in controllers as well as views, I am okay to write a a component wrapper and a view wrapper for this method but the core logic should be common.
Some mentioned bootrap is a place but putting there do i have all the cake defined parameters or constants available from that location? or there is a better place
EDIT
I gave only authentication related example but there can be more cases like, a view helper for displaying data/time based on offset time set in database (system time + offsetime), i have been forced to use of same code in controllers also (ajax output). What does it imply that in common code we not only have shared logic but also some shared data too, so for only session classes appears to be providing shared data!
On the whole, I'm inclined to say you're not going about this the right way. If you have to include the same piece of logic in both the controller and the view, chances are you're doing the same work twice, which is always a bad idea. DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) is something you probably heard about a million times before.
However, in the case you mention (authentication): this is done in the Controller, which relies on the Model layer to find out if the user has the permissions to see/use edit links.
Based on the data the controller receives from the Model layer, it should do one of the following things:
choose to render a specific view (with/without edit links)
Present the user with an error view
redirect to the login
For the first case, an editable and non-editable view, you can choose to use the same view script, and use a helper to pass on the session information to the view. Effectively giving the view the means to check a users' session, check if the user in question has the rights required to see the edit links and render them...
Another simple fix would be to set a property of the view to true for editable and false for non-editable in the controller, and check that bool flag in the view. No extra logic required.
The main thing here is that what you're after is authenticating the user. By the time you reached the view, the route is a given, there's no way back. If you find yourself still having to validate the users' identity, you've made a mistake at an earlier point: the controller, and model layer is where this kind of core logic should reside.
A view contains no logic other than its own: a loop or 2, some if-else's... nothing more.
The rule of thumb, then is: the first thing the controller does is authenticate the user. The authentication itself is the concern of the Model layer: no actual core/business logic should be in the controller. Based on the findings the model layer returns (authentication failed, or user has rights to do X, but not Y), the controller can redirect, throw errors or choose to render a specific view.
Only after all these things are performed the view is brought in. If there's a user in play, the view can assume that this user is valid, and has the rights required to see its contents. The view does not validate data, nor does it authenticate users.
To authenticate a user the Cake-specific way there's a core Authentication component that seems to be quite well documented. See if you can't use that...
You can add simple functions to bootstrap, but another option would be to create a class in app/Lib/ using static methods. Then from any controller you can include the library and use the methods defined:-
App::uses('MyLibrary', 'Lib');
If all controllers need to use these just include the library in AppController.
For your views I'd then consider defining a View Helper that would apply the methods used in MyLibrary.
This is a long running question that gets me every time I am developing.
I suppose it is not specific to CodeIgniter, but as I am using it, I will consider it in my example.
Firstly, which is better:
function add_entry($data_array)
{
//code to add entry
}
function edit_entry($data_array)
{
//code to update entry
}
OR
function save_changes($what,$data_array)
{
//if what == update update
//otherwise insert
}
Both produce the same action, but does it really matter which one you use?
Getting onto more complicated things.
I have a page where I need to get ONE entry from the database.
I also have a page where I need to get all the entries from the same database ordered by a user specified column.
My resultant method is a function similar to
function($data_array,$order_by='',$limit='')
{
//get where $data_array
//if order_by!='' add order by
//if limit !='' add limit
}
As I develop my application and realise new places where I need 'similar' database functionality I am what feels like hacking previous methods so they work with all my case scenarios. The methods end up containing lots of conditional statements, and getting quite complex with in some cases 4 or 5 input parameters.
Have I missed the point? I don't want duplicate code, and when for the most part the functions are very similar I feel like this 'hacking' methodology works best.
Could someone advise?
Finally my admin functionality is part of the same application in an admin controller. I have an admin model which contains specific methods for admin db interaction. I however use some model functionality from 'user' models.
FOr example if on an admin page I need to get details of a db entry I may load the user model to access this function. There is nothing wrong/insecure about this..? right?
In addition to that within my admin model itself I need to get data about a user database entry so I call my user model directly from my admin model. This is strictly OK, but why? If i need data and there is already a method in my user model which gets it.. it seems a little pointless to rewrite the code in the admin model BUT each time that function is called does it load the whole user model again?
Thanks a lot all.
In order, add edit in the model vs save. Personally I have a save built in MY_Model that chooses whether it is a save or an edit depending on the existence of a primary key in the data being passed, so obviously I prefer that method it means a lot less duplication of code since I can use the save for any table without having functions in the model at all.
As to the second question I think it depends on situation. I also have a number of functions that have a ton of conditionals on them depending on where they're used and for what. In some cases I'm finding this makes the legibility of the code a little rough. If you're running them all through if statements it also could be impacting performance. DRY is a concept, not a rule and like other design concepts there are times when they just don't make sense, it's like database normalization, it's my personal opinion it's VERY easy to over normalize a database and destroy performance and usability.
Finally, using user functions in the admin code. I don't see an issue here at all, the reverse probably isn't true, but rewriting a function just because it's an "admin" function, when it's identical to a user function is utterly pointless. So you're correct there, it's a waste of time and space.
Something that has always bothered me is doing more than one loop to manipulate an array.
What I mean is, in the controller the data is fetched from the DB via a model. Lets say we are showing a list of users, and each user has a status (1,2,3 equates to verified, unverified, banned respectively). Within each iteration of the loop the status would be checked and displayed via another Db query (forget mysql joins in this example).
Now, would you do that in the controller within a loop, and then perform another loop in the view with all the data already fetched and pre-formed ready for display (therefore resulting in 2 loops).
--OR--
Would you just do it in the view therefore resulting in the one loop but with model calls from the view. I understand that this is ok in the strict MVC pattern but its frowned upon generally.
It seems silly to loop twice but then its tidier as all the data manipulation is kept within the controller.
I would do that nor in the view or the controller but on the model.
I explain :
Your controller's job is to retrieve the expected user list, check ACL, etc...
Your view's job is to present this data in an elegant form
Your Model job's in to fetch/store data from Database and ensure integrity. Userstatus is a model too for me.
My configuration make this pretty easy, I use mustache (Php port) for view, which allow me to call methods from my models directly in view. I wrote my own ORM for my models, that way I have wrappers.
Such code would look like that for me :
// Controller
$template = new Template('pages/users.html');
$template->users = mUser::find(); // return array of mUsers instances
echo $template->render();
// View
{{#users}} <!-- For each user -->
{{getName}} has status {{#getStatus}}{{getStatusName}}{{/getStatus}}<br />
<!-- getStatus is a method from mUser model, that return a mUserStatus instance -->
{{/users}}
/* More explain on the view syntax
{{name}} = $user->getName() (return string)
{{getStatus}} = $user->getStatus() (return instance of mUserStatus);
{{statusName}} = $user->getStatus()->getStatusName();
*/
You may want to have request caching for each model instances in request level so that you never runs a request twice times if not needed.
That seems more natural to me than to delegate it to controller. I try to put business intelligence on controllers, there is no need for intelligence nor programmer intervention to retrieve a status name for each user.
I Hope it help.
In my opinion logic that manipulates the data you're returning, should be located in the controller. Logic that manipulates the representation of your data can be located in the view.
So I would go for the second option.
But, as you pointed out yourself this is a choice of implementation.
Also note that multiple round trips to your DB are bad for performance. Your example is a typical n+1 problem, meaning that you have 1 'top' select query and then N more queries for each row in your first result set. If you encounter such a problem always try to solve them on the DB level.
Another note I would like to add is that in your example you're storing status explanations in the DB. If you want to provide your applications in other languages, this might prove to be a problem. But this is beyond the scope of your question :)
Doing two loops is the clean way. That is what I would do for most cases, but I think there is no gerneral answer to this. Like if you have a lot a data and performance gets an issue it would be better to forgett about MVC and just use one loop.
A third way would be to use a helper function you can call from the view. Now that I think about it... that would probably be the best way.
I have 3 tables that contain user information, one for students, one for teachers and one for administrators.
They are not related in any way. I wan't to create a dashboard for the Administrators, where a list of students and teachers shows up.
The only way I found to achieve this was using the $uses variable in the Administrators controller. However, I have read in many places that this is bad practice.
Any solutions?
Another, perhaps better practice is the use of ClassRegistry::init('MyModel')->myMethod() (more reading # Cake API)
This only loads the object when it's used, as opposed to loadModel or uses, with ClassRegistry the models are treated as singletons.
--
that you are doing something wrong: you need access to a model that has nothing to do with your current controller.
There are plenty of conditions where you would need to access all of your models data, from one controller, but never a definitive answer on how to do it without breaking convention!
You can always use another Model which is not related by using
$this->loadModel('NewModelName');
Then you can access new loaded model by:
$this->NewModelName->add(); // whatever method model has defined
Why prefer loadModel() over uses?
To gain performance. How? uses calls the loadModel function itself to load all the models you specify in uses array. But the problem is if only one of your action needs a particular model, whats the good thing to include it in every action. e.g. only add() action requires an unrelated model, but if you have specified it in uses array, no matter what action gets called a completely unrelated model is going to load. To put simply it will be inefficient. Its like you have declared variables in a C programme but never used them. In case of C compiler will warn you that you are not using your variables, but unfortunately cake couldn't tell you.
Its alright to use uses if all your actions needs to load that model, use loadModel() otherwise.
You probably didn't read my answer in your other question :))
I have 3 tables that contain user information, one for students, one for teachers and one for administrators. They are not related in any way. I wan't to create a dashboard for the Administrators, where a list of students and teachers shows up.
The problem is you are separating similar data into 3 different tables, in this case, user information. So when you try to manage this data, you hit a brick wall: because you leave out the relationships when you separate them in 3 tables.
The only way I found to achieve this was using the $uses variable in the Administrators controller.
You got the wrong idea about the controller. Each controller manage the data flow of a particular model (and related models). It doesn't mean that you have to stay in Admin controller to do administrative things. What model you want to manipulate decides what controller you need to be in.
However, I have read in many places that this is bad practice.
Now for the main question: using $uses is a red flag that you are doing something wrong: you need access to a model that has nothing to do with your current controller. Now, there're always exceptions in programming, sometimes we need to have access to that model. That's where loadModel comes in. Because it should be rare. If you need the model a lot, then you'll need to call loadModel a lot, which is cumbersome, which is what $uses is for, but then that means something's wrong with your app design :))
So, you can say using $uses is a sign of bad decision (in DB design or application structure); and so is using loadModel a lot.
Edit: Any solutions?
I gave one solution in your other question. But if you want to have them all in one place, you can have 1 users table with user information. Each User can hasOne Student, Teacher, Administrator and a 'group' field to decide what group the User is. The third solution is using $uses. Its performance impact won't be a problem really. But it will be pretty convoluted when you develop your app further. That's what you need to worry about. For example, I can say that, if you use Auth, you'll need to tweak it a fair bit to get it working with 3 models. If you use the users table, it will be a lot easier.