What's your experience with Doctrine ORM? [closed] - php

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
What's your experience with doctrine?
I've never been much of an ORM kind of guy, I mostlymanaged with just some basic db abstraction layer like adodb.
But I understood all the concepts and benifits of it. So when a project came along that needed an ORM I thought that I'd give one of the ORM framework a try.
I've to decide between doctrine and propel so I choose doctrine because I didn't want to handle the phing requirement.
I don't know what I did wrong. I came in with the right mindset. And I am by no means a 'junior' php kiddie. But I've been fighting the system each step of the way. There's a lot of documentation but it all feels a little disorganize. And simple stuff like YAML to db table creation just wouldn;t work and just bork out without even an error or anything. A lot of other stuff works a little funky require just that extra bit of tweaking before working.
Maybe I made some soft of stupid newbie assumption here that once I found out what it is I'll have the aha moment. But now I'm totally hating the system.
Is there maybe some tips anyone can give or maybe point me to a good resource on the subject or some authoritative site/person about this? Or maybe just recommend another ORM framework that 'just works"?

I have mixed feelings. I am a master at SQL only because it is so easy to verify. You can test SELECT statements quickly until you get the results right. And to refactor is a snap.
In Doctorine, or any ORM, there are so many layers of abstraction it almost seems OCD (obsessive/compulsive). In my latest project, in which I tried out Doctrine, I hit several walls. It took me days to figure out a solution for something that I knew I could have written in SQL in a matter of minutes. That is soooo frustrating.
I'm being grumpy. The community for SQL is HUGE. The community/support for Doctrine is minuscule. Sure you could look at the source and try to figure it out ... and those are the issues that take days to figure out.
Bottom line: don't try out Doctrine, or any ORM, without planning in a lot of time for grokking on your own.

I think mtbikemike sums it up perfectly: "It took me days to figure out a solution for something that I knew I could have written in SQL in a matter of minutes." That was also my experience. SAD (Slow Application Development) is guaranteed. Not to mention ugly code and limitations around every corner. Things that should take minutes take days and things that would normally be more complicated and take hours or days are just not doable (or not worth the time). The resulting code is much more verbose and cryptic (because we really need another query language, DQL, to make things even less readable). Strange bugs are all around and most of the time is spent hunting them down and running into limitations and problems. Doctrine (I only used v2.x) is akin to an exercise in futility and has absolutely no benefits. It's by far the most hated component of my current system and really the only one with huge problems. Coming into a new system, I'm always going back and forth from the db to the entity classes trying to figure out which name is proper in different places in the code. A total nightmare.
I don't see a single pro to Doctrine, only cons. I don't know why it exists, and every day I wish it didn't (at least in my projects).

we have been using Propel with Symfony for 2 years and Doctrine with Symfony for more than 1 year. I can say that moving to ORM with MVC framework was the best step we've made. I would recommend sticking with Doctrine eventhough it takes some time to learn how to work with it. In the end you'll find your code more readable and flexible.
If you're searching for some place where to start, I would recommend Symfony Jobeet tutorial http://www.symfony-project.org/jobeet/1_4/Doctrine/en/ (chapters 3, 6 covers the basics) and of course Doctrine documentation.
As I wrote above we have been using Doctrine for some time now. To make our work more comfortable we developed a tool called ORM Designer (www.orm-designer.com) where you can define DB model in a graphical user interface (no more YAML files :-), which aren't btw bad at all). You can find there also some helpful tutorials.

My experiences sound similar to yours. I've only just started using doctrine, and have never used Propel. However I am very disapointed in Doctrine. It's documentation is terrible. Poorly organised, and quite incomplete.

Propel and Doctrine uses PDO. PDO has a lot of open bugs with the Oracle Database. All of them related with CLOB fields. Please keep this in mind before starting a new project if you are working with Oracle. The bugs are open since years ago. Doctrine and PDO will crash working with Oracle and CLOBs

I'm using Doctrine in a medium sized project where I had to work from pre-existing databases I don't own. It gives you alot of built in features, but I have one major complaint.
Since I had to generate my models from the databases and not vice-versa, my models are too close to the database: the fields have very similar names to the database columns, to get objects you have to query in what is essential sql (where do I put that code, and how do I test it?), etc.
In the end I had to write a complex wrapper for doctrine that makes me question if it wouldn't have been easier to just use the old dao/model approach and leave doctrine out of the picture. The jury is still out on that. Good luck!

Using Doctrine 2.5 in 2015. It was seemingly going well. Until I wanted to use two entities (in a JOIN). [it's better now after I got a hang of DQL]
Good:
generating SQL for me
use of Foreign Keys and Referential Integrity
InnoDB generation by default
updates made to SQL with doctrine command line tool
Okay:
being hyper-aware of naming and mapping and how to name and how to map entities to actual tables
The Bad
takes a lot of time - learning custom API of query builder. Or figuring out how to do a simple JOIN, wondering if better techniques are out there.. Simple JOINs seem to require writing custom functions if you want to do object oriented queries.
[update on first impression above] -- I chose to use DQL as it is most similar to SQL
It seems to me that the tool is great in concept but its proper execution desires much of developer's time to get onboard. I am tempted to use it for entity SQL generation but then use PDO for actual Input/Output. Only because I didn't learn yet how to do Foreign Key and Referential Integrity with SQL. But learning those seems to be much easier task than learning Doctrine ins and outs even with simple stuff like a entity equivalent of a JOIN.
Doctrine in Existing Projects
I (am just starting to) use Doctrine to develop new features on an existing project. So instead of adding new mysql table for example for the feature, I have added entities (which created the tables for me using Doctrine schema generation). I reserve not using Doctrine for existing tables until I get to know it better.
If I were to use it on existing tables, I would first ... clean the tables up, which includes:
adding id column which is a primary/surrogate key
using InnoDb/transaction-capable table
map it appropriately to an entity
run Doctrine validate tool (doctrine orm:validate-schema)
This is because Doctrine makes certain assumptions about your tables. And because you are essentially going to drive your tables via code. So your code and your tables have to be in as much as 1:1 agreement as possible. As such, Doctrine is not suitable for just any "free-form" tables in general.
But then, you might be able to, with some care and in some cases, get away with little things like an extra columns not being accounted for in your entities (I do not think that Doctrine checks unless you ask it to). You will have to construct your queries knowing what you are getting away with. i.e. when you request an "entity" as a whole, Doctrine requests all fields of the entity specifically by column name. If your actual schema contains more column names, I don't think Doctrine will mind (It does not, as I have verified by creating an extra column in my schema).
So yes it is possible to use Doctrine but I'd start small and with care. You will most likely have to convert your tables to support transactions and to have the surrogate index (primary key), to start with. For things like Foreign Keys, and Referential Integrity, you'll have to work with Doctrine on polishing your entities and matching them up perfectly. You may have to let Doctrine re-build your schema to use its own index names so that it can use FK and RI properly. You are essentially giving up some control of your tables to Doctrine, so I believe it has to know the schema in its own way (like being able to use its own index names, etc).

A little late for the party, but let me throw my two cents here. I will make connections with Laravel, because that is the framework I use.
Active Record vs. Data Mapping vs. Proper OOP
Laravel and many other frameworks love Active Record. It might be great for simple applications, and it saves you time for trivial DB management. However, from the OOP perspective it is a pure anti-pattern. SoC (Separation of Concerns) just got killed. It creates a coupling between the model attributes and SQL column names. Terrible for extensions and future updates.
As your project growths (and yes, it will!), ActiveRecord will be more and more of pain. Don't even think of updating SQL structure easily. Remember, you have the column names all over your PHP code.
I was hired for a project that aims to be quite big down the road. I saw the limits of ActiveRecord. I sat back for 3 weeks and rewrote everything using a Data Mapper, which separates DB from the layers above.
Now, back to the Data Mapper and why I didn't choose Doctrine.
The main idea of Data Mapper is, that it separates your database from your code. And that is the correct approach from the OOP perspective. SoC rules! I reviewed Doctrine in detail, and I immediately didn't like several aspects.
The mapping. Why in a world would anyone use comments as commands? I consider this to be an extremely bad practise. Why not just use a PHP Class to store the mapping relations?
Yaml or XML for the map. Again, Why?? Why wasting time parsing text files, when a regular PHP Class can be used. Plus, a class can be extended, inhereted, can contain methods, not just data. Etc.
If we have a mapper and a model carrying data, then it should be the mapper storing the model. Methods such as $product->save() ar just not good. Model handles data, it should not care about storing anything to the DB. It is a very tight coupling. If we spend time building a mapper, then why not having $mapper->save($product). By definition, it shall be the mapper knowing how to save the data.
Tools such as Doctrine or Eloquent save time at the beginning, no doubt about it. But here is the tricky question for everyone individually. What is the right compromise between /development time/future updates/price/simplicity/following OOP principles/? In the end, it is up to you to answer and decide properly.
My own DataMapper instead of Doctrine
I ended up developing my own DataMapper and I have already used it for several of my small projects. It works very nicely, easy to extend and reuse. Most of the time we just set up parameters and no new code is required.
Here are the key principles:
Model carries data, similar to Laravel's model. Example variable $model for the following examples.
ModelMap contains a field that maps the attributes of the Model to the columns of the table in the SQL database. ModelMaps knows the table name, id, etc. It knows which attributes should be tranfromed to json, which attributes should be hidden (e.g. deleted_at). This ModelMap contains aliases for columns with the same name (connected tables). Example variable: $modelMap.
ModelDataMapper is a class that accepts Model and ModelMap in the controller and provides the store/getById/deleteById functionalities. You simply call $modelMapper->store($model) and that's all.
The base DataMapper also handles pagination, search ability, converting arrays to json, it adds time stamps, it checks for soft deletes, etc. For simple usages, the base DataMapper is enough. For anything more complex, it is easy to extend it using inheritance.

Using Doctrine ORM in 2016 with Approx experience ~2 - 2.5 years.
Inherent Inconsistency
SELECT i, p
FROM \Entity\Item i
JOIN i.product p
WHERE ...
Assume entities are Item and Product. They are connected via Item.product_id to Product.id, and Product contains Product.model that we want to display along with Item.
Here is retrieval of same "product.model" from database, using the above SQL but varying SQL parameters:
//SELECT i, p
$ret[0]->getProduct()->getModel();
//SELECT i as item, p as product
$ret[0]['item']->getProduct()->getModel();
//SELECT i as item, p.model as model
$ret[0]['model'];
Point I am making is this:
Output ResultSet structure can change drastically depending on how you write your DQL/ORM SELECT statement.
From array of objects to array of associative array of objects, to array of associative array, depending on how you want to SELECT. Imagine you have to make a change to your SQL, then imagine having to go back to your code and re-do all the code associated with reading data from the result set. Ouch! Ouch! Ouch! Even if it's a few lines of code, you depend on the structure of result set, there is no full decoupling/common standard.
What Doctrine is good at
In some ways it removes dealing with SQL, crafting and maintaining your own tables. It's not perfect. Sometimes it fails and you have to go to MySQL command line and type SQL to adjust things to the point where Doctrine and you are happy, to where Doctrine sees column types as valid and to where you are happy with column types. You don't have to define your own foreign keys or indices, it is done for you auto-magically.
What Doctrine is bad at
Whenever you need to translate any significantly advanced SQL to DQL/ORM, you may struggle. Separately from that, you may also deal with inconsistencies like one above.
Final thoughts
I love Doctrine for creating/modifying tables for me and for converting table data to Objects, and persisting them back, and for using prepared statements and other checks and balances, making my data safer.
I love the feeling of persistent storage being taken care of by Doctrine from within the object oriented interface of PHP. I get that tingly feeling that I can think of my data as being part of my code, and ORM takes care of the dirty stuff of interacting with the database. Database feels more like a local variable and I have gained an appreciation that if you take care of your data, it will love you back.
I hate Doctrine for its inconsistencies and tough learning curve, and having to look up proprietary syntax for DQL when I know how to write stuff in SQL. SQL knowledge is readily available, DQL does not have that many experts out in the wild, nor an accumulated body of knowledge (compared to SQL) to help you when you get stuck.

I'm not an expert with Doctrine - just started using it myself and I have to admit it is a bit of a mixed experience. It does a lot for you, but it's not always immediately obvious how to tell it to do this or that.
For example when trying to use YAML files with the automatic relationship discovery the many-to-many relationship did not translate correctly into the php model definition. No errors as you mention, because it just did not treat it as many-to-many at all.
I would say that you probably need time to get your head around this or that way of doing things and how the elements interact together. And having the time to do things one step at a time would be a good thing and deal with the issues one at a time in a sort of isolation. Trying to do too much at once can be overwhelming and might make it harder to actually find the place something is going wrong.

After some research into the various ORM libraries for PHP, I decided on PHP ActiveRecord (see phpactiverecord). My decision came down to the little-to-no configuration, light-weight nature of the library, and the lack of code generation. Doctrine is simply too powerful for what I need; what PHP ActiveRecord doesn't do I can implement in my wrapper layer. I would suggest taking a moment and examining what your requirements are in an ORM and see if either a simple one like PHP ActiveRecord offers what you need or if a home-rolled active record implementation would be better.

For now I'm using Symfony framework with Doctrine ORM,
how about using Doctrine together with plain queries?
For e.g. from knpuniversity, I can create custom repository method like:
public function countNumberPrintedForCategory(Category $category)
{
$conn = $this->getEntityManager()
->getConnection();
$sql = '
SELECT SUM(fc.numberPrinted) as fortunesPrinted, AVG(fc.numberPrinted) as fortunesAverage, cat.name
FROM fortune_cookie fc
INNER JOIN category cat ON cat.id = fc.category_id
WHERE fc.category_id = :category
';
$stmt = $conn->prepare($sql);
$stmt->execute(array('category' => $category->getId()));
return $stmt->fetch();
... lines 30 - 37
}
I'm just use Doctrine Entities for e.g. creating an processing forms,
When I need more complex query I just make plain statement and take values I need, from this example I can also pass Entity as variable and take it values for making query. I think this solution is easy understand and it takes less time for building forms, passing data for them and writing complex queries is not as hard as writing them with Doctrine.

Related

How to add an ORM into an existing project

I have a client who has a website I work on. Basic LAMP architecture, but quite large. I have successfully lobbied to get them to pay me to start refactoring it, and one of the first things I am going to do is to split out a proper database layer, where at the moment there are only scattered SQL queries all over a completely procedural codebase (the only objects are made by instanciating stdClass() and adding properties to it.)
What I would like to do is create objects that map to the database, so I can query them and have the SQL made for me behind the scenes. So I need an ORM. I have read the docs on Doctrine 2 and I like it.
Is it possible to do this, given that the database itself is as far as I can tell properly relational, or do all ORMs insist on their own table names?
Should I roll my own?
Sure, you can also reverse engine it:
http://docs.doctrine-project.org/en/2.0.x/reference/tools.html#convert-mapping-information

Using the database features of the Yii framework

I recently started working with Yii PHP MVC Framework. I'm looking for advice on how should I continue working with the database through the framework: should I use framework's base class CActiveRecord which deals with the DB, or should I go with the classic SQL query functions (in my case mssql)?
Obviously or not, for me it seems easier to deal with the DB through classic SQL queries, but, at some point, I imagine there has to be an advantage in using framework's way.
Some SQL queries will get pretty complex pretty often. I just can't comprehend how the framework could help me and not make things more complicated than they actually are.
Very General rule from my experience with Yii and massive databases:
Use Yii Active Record when:
You want to retrieve and post single to a few rows in the database (e.g. user changing his/her settings, updating users balance, adding a vote, getting a count of users online, getting the number of posts under a topic, checking if a model exists)
You want to rapidly design a hierarchical model structure between your tables, (e.g. $user->info->email,$user->settings->currency) allowing you to quickly adjust displayed currency/settings per use.
Stay away from Yii Active Record when:
You want to update several 100 records at a time. (too much overhead for the model)
Yii::app()->db->command()
allows you to avoid the heavy objects and retrieves data in simple arrays.
You want to do advanced joins and queries that involve multiple tables.
Any batch job!! (e.g. checking a payments table to see which customers are overdue on their payments, updating database values etc.)
I love Yii Active Record, but I interchange between the Active Record Model and plain SQL (using Yii::app()->db) based on the requirement in the application.
At the end I have the option whether I want to update a single users currency
$user->info->currency = 'USD';
$user->info->save();
or if I want to update all users currencies:
Yii::app()->db->command('UPDATE ..... SET Currency="USD" where ...');
In any language when dealing with the database a framework can help you by providing an abstraction over the database.
Here is a scenario I know I found myself in many times during my earlier development days:
I have an application that needs a database.
I write a ton of code.
I put the SQL statements in the code along with everything else.
The database changes somehow.
I'm stuck with having to go back and make 100 changes to all my SQL statements.
It's very frustrating.
Another scenario I found:
I write a ton of code against a database.
Bugs come in. Lots of bugs. I can't figure them all out.
I'm asked to write tests for my code.
This is impossible because all my code relies on a direct implementation of the database. How do you test SQL statements when they're with the actual code?
So my advice is to use the framework because it can provide an abstraction over the database. This gives you two really big advantages:
You can potentially swap out the database later and your code stays the same! If you're using interfaces/some framework, then most likely you're dealing with objects and not SQL statements directly. A given implementation might know how to write to MySQL or SQL Server, but in general your code just says "Write this object", "Read that list."
You can test your code! A good framework that deals with data will let you mock the database so you can test it easily.
Try to avoid writing SQL statements directly in the application. It'll save you pain later.
I'm unfamiliar with the database system bundled with Yii, but would advise you to use it a little bit to start with. My experience is with Propel, a popular PHP ORM. In general, ORM systems have a class per table (Propel has three per table).
Now, there'll probably be a syntax to do lookups and joins etc, but the first thing to do is to work out how to use raw SQL in your queries (for any of the CRUD operations). Put methods to do these queries in your model classes, so at least you will be benefitting from centralisation of code.
Once you've got that working, you can migrate to the recommended approach at a later time, without getting overwhelmed with the amount of material you have to learn in one go. Learning Yii (especially how to share code amongst controllers, and to write maintainable view templates) takes a while, so it may be sensible not to over-complicate it with many other things as well.
Why to use Yii:
Just imagine that you have many modules and for each module you have to write a pagination code; writing in old fashion style, will need a lot of time;
Why not use Yii ClistView widget? Oh, and this widget comes with a bonus: the data provider and the auto checking for the existance of the article that is about to be printed;
When using Yii CListView with results from ... Sphinx search engine, the widget will check if the article do really exists, because the result may not be correct
How long will it take for you to write a detection code for non existing registration?
And when you have different types of projects will you addapt the methods?
NO! Yii does this for you.
How long would it take for you to write the code in crud style ? create, read, update, delete ?
Are you going to adapt the old code from another project ?
Yii has a miracle module, called Gii, that generates models, modules, forms, controllers, the crud ... and many more
at first it might seem hard, but when you get experienced, it's easy
I would suggest you should use CActiveRecord.It will give many advantages -
You can use many widgets within yii directly as mentioned above.(For paginations,grids etc)
The queries which are generated by the Yii ORM are highly optimized.
You dont need to put the results extracted from SQLs in your VO objects.
If the tables for some reason modified(addition/deletion of column,changing data type), you just need to regenerate the models using the tool provided by yii.Just make sure you try to avoid doing any code changes in the models generated by yii, that will save your merging efforts.
If you plan to change the DB from MYSQL to other vendor in futur, it would be just config change for you.
Also you and your team would save your precious development time.

RedBean ORM performance [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I would like to know whether Redbean ORM can be used for performance oriented scenarios like social networking web apps or no and is it stable even if thousands of data are pulled by multiple users at same time. Also I'd like to know whether Redbean consumes more memory space.
Can anyone offer a comparison study of Doctrine-Propel-Redbean?
I feel Tereško's answer is not quite right.
Firstly it does not address the original question. It's indeed a case against ORMs, and I agree with the problems described in his answer. That's why I wrote RedBeanPHP. Just because most ORMs fail to make your life a bit easier does not mean the concept of an object relational mapping system is flawed. Most ORMs try to hide SQL, which is why JOINs get so complex; they need to re-invent something similar in an object oriented environment. This is where RedBeanPHP differs, as it does not hide SQL. It creates readable, valid SQL tables that are easy to query. Instead of a fabricated query language RedBeanPHP uses plain old SQL for record and bean retrieval. In short; RedBeanPHP works with SQL rather than against it. This makes it a lot less complex.
And yes, the performance of RedBeanPHP is good. How can I be so sure? Because unlike other ORMs, RedBeanPHP distinguishes between development mode and production mode. During the development cycle the database is fluid; you can add entries and they will be added dynamically. RedBeanPHP creates the columns, indexes, guesses the data types etc. It even stretches up columns if you need more bytes (higher data type) after a while. This makes RedBeanPHP extremely slow, but only during development time when speed should not be an issue. Once you are done developing you use freeze the database with a single mode specifier R::freeze() and no more checks are done. What you are left with is a pretty straight forward database layer on your production server. And because not much is done, performance is good.
Yes, I know, I am the author of RedBeanPHP so I am biased. However I felt like my ORM was being viewed in the same light as the other ORMs, which prompted me to write this. If you want to know more, feel free to consult the RedBeanPHP website, and here is a discussion on performance.
At our company we use RedBeanPHP for embedded systems as well as financial business systems, so it seems to scale rather well.
Together, me and the RedBeanPHP community are sincerely trying to make the ORM world a better place; you can read the mission statement here.
Good luck with your project and I hope you find the technical solution you are looking for.
#tereško if tis possible, can you give the pros and cons of orm with respect to pure sql according to your experience and also i will google the topic at same time. – Jaison Justus
Well .. explaining this in 600 characters would be hard.
One thing I must clarify: this is about ORMs in PHP, though i am pretty sure it applies to some Ruby ORMs too and maybe others.
In brief, you should avoid them, but if you have to use an ORM, then you will be better of with Doctrine 2.x , it's the lesser evil. (Implements something similar to DataMapper instead of ActiveRecord).
Case against ORMs
The main reason why some developers like to use ORMs is also the worst thing about them: it is easy to do simple thing in ORM, with very minor performance costs. This is perfectly fine.
1. Exponential complexity
The problem originates in people to same tool for everything. If all you have is a hammer (..) type of issue. This results in creating a technical debt.
At first it is easy to write new DB related code. And maybe, because you have a large project, management in first weeks (because later it would case additional issues - read The Mythical Man-Month, if interested in details) decides to hire more people. And you end up preferring people with ORM skills over general SQL.
But, as project progresses, you will begin to use ORM for solving increasingly complex problems. You will start to hack around some limitations and eventually you may end up with problems which just cannot be solved even with all the ORM hacks you know ... and now you do not have the SQL experts, because you did not hire them.
Additionally most of popular ORMs are implementing ActiveRecord, which means that your application's business logic is directly coupled to ORM. And adding new features will take more and more time because of that coupling. And for the same reason, it is extremely hard to write good unit-tests for them.
2. Performance
I already mentioned that even simple uses of ORM (working with single table, no JOIN) have some performance costs. It is due to the fact that they use wildcard * for selecting data. When you need just the list of article IDs and titles, there is no point on fetching the content.
ORMs are really bad at working with multiple tables, when you need data based on multiple conditions. Consider the problem:
Database contains 4 tables: Projects, Presentations, Slides and Bulletpoints.
Projects have many Presentations
Presentations have many Slides
Slides have many Bulletpoitns
And you need to find content from all the Bulletpoints in the Slides tagged as "important" from 4 latest Presentations related to the Projects with ids 2, 4 and 8.
This is a simple JOIN to write in pure SQL, but in any ORM implementation, that i have seen, this will result in 3-level nested loop, with queries at every level.
P.S. there are other reasons and side-effects, but they are relatively minor .. cannot remember any other important issues right now.
I differ from #tereško here - ORMs can make database queries easier to write and easier to maintain. There is some great work going into Propel and Doctrine, in my opinion - take advantage of them! There are a number of performance comparisons on the web, and check out NotORM as well (I've not used it but they do some comparisons to Doctrine, if I recall correctly).
If you get to a point where your throughput requires you to do raw SQL then optimise at that point. But in terms of reducing your bug count and increasing your productivity, I think that your savings will fund a better server anyway. Of course, your mileage may vary.
I don't know RedBean, incidentally, but I am mildly of the view that Propel is faster than Doctrine in most cases, since the classes are pre-generated. I used Propel when it was the only option and have stuck with it, though I certainly wouldn't be averse to using Doctrine.
2018 update
Propel 2 is still in alpha after a number of years, and is in need of a number of large refactoring projects, which sadly were not getting done. Although the maintainers say that this alpha is good to use in production, since it has good test coverage, they have now started on Propel 3. Unfortunately, this has not actually had any releases yet, at the time of my writing this, despite the repository being a year old.
While I think Propel was a great project, I wonder if it is best to use something else for the time being. It could yet rise from the ashes!
I would go with "Horses for Courses" situation that utilizes a mix and match of both the worlds. I have built few large scale applications using RedBean, so my comment will focus purely on RedBean and not on other ORMs.
IS RedBean ORM SLOW?
Well, it depends on how you use it. In certain scenarios, it's faster than traditional query because RedBean cache the result for few seconds. Reusing the query will produce result faster. Have a look at the log using R::debug(true); It always shows
"SELECT * FROM `table` -- keep-cache"
Scenario 1: Fetching All (*)
In RedBean if you query
$result = R::findOne('table', ' id = ?', array($id));
This is represented as
$result= mysql_query("Select * from TABLE where id =".$id);
You may argue that if the table is having multiple columns why should you query (*).
Scenario 2: Single column
Fetching a single column
R::getCol( 'SELECT first_name FROM accounts' );
Like i mentioned "Horses for Courses", developers should not simply rely on FindOne, FindAll, FindFirst, FindLast but also carefully draft what they really need.
Scenario 3: Caching
When you don't need caching, you can disable at application level which isn't an ideal situation
R::$writer->setUseCache(true);
RedBean suggests that if you don't want to disable caching at the application level you should use traditional query with no-cache parameter like $result = R::exec("SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE * FROM TABLE");
This perfectly solves the problem of fetching real-time data from table by completely discarding query cache.
Scenario 4: Rapid Development
Using ORM makes your application development really fast, developers can code using ORM 2-3x faster than writing SQL.
Scenario 5: Complex Queries & Relationships
RedBean presents a really nice way of implementing complex queries and one-to-many or many-to-many relationships
Plain SQL for complex queries
$books = R::getAll( 'SELECT
book.title AS title,
author.name AS author,
GROUP_CONCAT(category.name) AS categories FROM book
JOIN author ON author.id = book.author_id
LEFT JOIN book_category ON book_category.book_id = book.id
LEFT JOIN category ON book_category.category_id = category.id
GROUP BY book.id
' );
foreach( $books as $book ) {
echo $book['title'];
echo $book['author'];
echo $book['categories'];
}
OR RedBean way of handling many-t-to-many relationships
list($vase, $lamp) = R::dispense('product', 2);
$tag = R::dispense( 'tag' );
$tag->name = 'Art Deco';
//creates product_tag table!
$vase->sharedTagList[] = $tag;
$lamp->sharedTagList[] = $tag;
R::storeAll( [$vase, $lamp] );
Performance Issues
The arguments like ORMs are typically slow, consumes more memory and tends to make an application slow. I think they are not talking about RedBean.
We have tested it with MySQL and Postgres both, trust me performance was never a bottleneck.
There is no denying that ORMs adds up little overhead and tend to make your application slower ( just a little ). Using ORM is primarily a trade-off between developer time and slightly slower runtime performance. My strategy is to first build the application end-to-end with the ORM then based on test cases, tweak the speed critical modules to use straight data access.

CakePHP for big projects

We are evaluating some PHP Frameworks for a productive website. CakePHP looks pretty interesting but we have no clue if it fits our needs.
Basically when you check the documentation and the tutorials for CakePHP it looks really promising. Nevertheless there were always some things that bugged me with frameworks so far, maybe someone who already used CakePHP in a productive project could answer this questions for me?
Writing/Reading data for single records looks pretty neat in CakePHP. What happens if you want to read data from multiple tables with complex conditions, group by, where clauses? How does CakePHP handle it?
Scaffolding looks pretty nice for basic administration interfaces. How easy is it to customize this stuff. Let's say I have a foreign key on one of my tables. When I create a scaffolding page, does CakePHP automatically create a dropdown list for me with all the possible items? What if I want to filter the possible items? Let's say I want to combine two fields into one field in the view part, but when I edit it, I should be able to edit both of those fields individually. Does this work?
Do you think you were faster in development with CakePHP than with let's say plain PHP?
I've used CakePHP, Zend Framework and I've also written applications "from the ground up" with nothing more than homegrown classes and such. To that I'd like to mention that I use CakePHP regularly so, take that as you will.
(Writing/reading data, complex conditions) You can certainly do everything you mentioned. Others are correct in that it attempts to abstract away SQL operations for you. I've yet to have a query that I couldn't translate into Cake's "parlance"; complex geospatial queries, joins, etc.
(Scaffolding, complex conditions) The scaffolding is really only meant to serve as a "jump start" of sorts to help make sure your model associations and such are setup correctly and should not be used as a permanent solution. To that end, yes it will do a fairly good job at introspecting your relationships and providing relevant markup.
(Faster development) Of course. There is a large community with a vast number of plugins or examples out there to help get you started. Regardless of what you pick, choosing a framework will almost certainly make you "faster" if only for handling the minutiae that comes with setting up an application.
It really depends on your definition of "large". Are you referring to big datasets? A very complex domain model? Or just lots and lots of different controllers/actions?
Writing/Reading data.
Anything you can do with plain SQL you can do in CakePHP. It may not always be very nice to do, but at it's worst it's no worse than straight SQL.
But you really shouldn't be thinking about queries. You should be thinking about your domain model. CakePHP implements the active record pattern. It works very well if your domain model maps nicely to an active record pattern. But if it does not, then I would not recommend CakePHP. If your domain model doesn't map to Active Record then you will spend a lot of time fighting the Cake way of doing things. And that's no fun. You would be much better off with a framework that implements a Data Mapper pattern (e.g. Zend).
Scaffolding
Scaffolding is temporary. It does handle foreign keys (if you define them in the model as well as in the database) but that's it. You can't modify the scaffolding. But, you can bake them!
When you bake a controller or view then you're basically writing the scaffold to a file as a jump-off point for your own implementation. After baking, you can do anything that you want. The downside of baking is that it doesn't update anymore when the models or database changes. So, if you bake a controller and views and you add fields to your model, then you need to add those fields manually to your controller and view code.
speed of development
In my case, I'm a lot faster developing a website in CakePHP then in plain code. But only if Active Record suits the application! See my first point. Even then, Cake is probably still faster, but I would be faster still with a better suiting framework.
Some other thoughts
large datasets
If you have very large datasets and big query results then Cake can be a problem. A find() operation wants to return an associative array, so all the rows are read, parsed and converted to arrays. If your result set is too large you will run out of memory. CakePHP does not implement ResultSet objects like many other Active Record implementations and that is a definite downside. You end up manually paging through your own data with subqueries. Yuck. Wich brings me to my next point:
arrays
Learn to love them because CakePHP does. Everything is an array and often they are large, complex and deep. It gets really annoying after a while. You can't add functions to arrays so your code is more messy than if CakePHP would have used nested object instances. The functions you can add to those objects can help keep your code clean.
oddities and inconsistencies
CakePHP has some real nasty stinkers hidden deep within. If Active Record suits your application then you will probably never run into them, but if you try to mold CakePHP into something more complex, then you will have to fight these. Some examples:
HABTM through a custom model uses the definition from the other side of the relationship that you're working on.
Some really odd places where your before/after triggers aren't called (e.g. not from an updateAll)
odd Model->field() behavior. It always queries from the database. So, be careful about updating model data without immediately saving it to the database. Some CakePHP functions fetch data from Model->$_data and some use Model->field(). The result may be entirely different resulting in some very hard to track down bugs.
In short
I would highly recommend CakePHP even for "large" sites, as long as your domain model fits nicely on top of Active Record. If not, pick a different framework.
Since you are asking for opinions, then I have to say that I advise AGAINST CakePHP.
My biggest gripe with it, is that it's still using PHP4 (written in and code generated). So, why go backwards? It is compatible for PHP5, but the framework itself revolves around PHP4.
I would recommend taking a look at Symfony or Zend. Symfony being the best if you want more structure in place - it forces you to adhere to the MVC structure that it has established.
The alternative is Zend, but it's more of a 'do-it-yourself' framework, or rather more of a set of libraries. You need to put it all together yourself, and it doesn't have any strict structure like Symfony.
There are obviously other frameworks, but I recommend the fore-said. Another one that you may want to look at is Codeigniter.
CakePHP tries to abstract away the database, so you write very little SQL (however, you write a lot of SQL snippets).
The basic process is to define your models, then define the relationship between models (hasOne, belongsTo, hasMany, hasAndBelongsToMany). You can put any conditions or default ordering on these associations you like. Then, whenever you fetch a row from the database, any associated rows are automatically fetched with it. It's very easy and powerful.
Everything comes with a bunch of configuration options, giving further flexibility. For example, when fetching data there is a recursion option which takes an integer. This value is how many associations deep Cake should fetch data. So if you wanted to fetch a user with all their associated data, and all the joined data to THAT, it's trivial.
Pretty much anything can be overridden on defined on the fly, and you can always fall back to writing your own SQL, so there's nothing Cake prevents you from doing...
I've not found much use for scaffolding. The answer to your question is yes, it'll auto populate joined dropdowns, etc. But I've never used it as a basis to build an interface. I tend to use a database tool to populate data early on rather than scaffolding.
I've built and also maintain several web-apps on CakePHP, and it is without question faster than 'rolling your own'. But I think that's true of any decent framework!
Unfortunately one of the weaker points is the documentation. Often you need to Google for answers as the official documentation is a bit hit-and-miss at times.
Just go with Yii framework, it's the best in this category.
(Note: This is a subjective question. You are asking for opinions. So I hope you don't mind if I give mine.)
(Edit: Ops. I mixed Cake with CI)
I used Code Igniter a while back. It did everything it should and was fairly easy to understand. However, for big projects, it lacked features. Many CI proponents say that this is it's strength as it keeps it fast and can make little RAM. This is true.
However, after developing one application with it, I found myself looking elsewhere so I would not have to write code that must have been written before. I looked at CakePHP and found it too restrictive and automagical. In particular, I needed some kind of ACL functionality. This lead me to Zend Framework. I learned that it is loosely coupled. I can include only the files I need. I can also make use of Zend_Application for large projects. It's object oriented design is a must when developing and maintaining large projects.
Yes, CI and CakePHP helped me to develop faster than with plain PHP. However, there are much more powerful frameworks. I hear and see good things about Symphony. There are quite a few more. I'm sure others will point them out.

How do I write object classes effectively when dealing with table joins?

I should start by saying I'm not now, nor do I have any delusions I'll ever be a professional programmer so most of my skills have been learned from experience very much as a hobby.
I learned PHP as it seemed a good simple introduction in certain areas and it allowed me to design simple web applications.
When I learned about objects, classes etc the tutor's basic examnples covered the idea that as a rule of thumb each database table should have its own class. While that worked well for the photo gallery project we wrote, as it had very simple mysql queries, it's not working so well now my projects are getting more complex. If I require data from two separate tables which require a table join I've instead been ignoring the class altogether and handling it on a case by case basis, OR, even worse been combining some of the data into the class and the rest as a separate entity and doing two queries, which to me seems inefficient.
As an example, when viewing content on a forum I wrote, if you view a thread, I retrieve data from the threads table, the posts table and the user table. The queries from the user and posts table are retrieved via a join and not instantiated as an object, whereas the thread data is called using my Threads class.
So how do I get from my current state of affairs to something a little less 'stupid', for want of a better word. Right now I have a DB class that deals with connection and escaping values etc, a parent db query class that deals with the common queries and methods, and all of the other classes (Thread, Upload, Session, Photo and ones thats aren't used Post, User etc ) are children of that.
Do I make a big posts class that has the relevant extra attributes that I retrieve from the users (and potentially threads) table?
Do I have separate classes that populate each of their relevant attributes with a single query? If so how do I do that?
Because of the way my classes are written, based on what I was taught, my db update row method, or insert method both just take the attributes as an array and update all of that, if I have extra attributes from other db tables in each class then how do I rewrite those methods as obbiously updating automatically like that would result in errors?
In short I think my understanding is limited right now and I'd like some pointers when it comes to the fundamentals of how to write more complex classes.
Edit:
Thanks for the answers so far they've given me lots of pointers and thoughts and a lot of reading material. What I would like though is maybe an idea of how different people have decided to handle a simple table join with any amount of classes? Did you add attributes to the classes? Query from outside the class then pass the results into each class? Something else?
Entire books have been written about how to design a set of classes to fit a database schema.
Long story short: there is no one-size-fits-all way to do it, you have to make a lot of design decisions about the trade offs you want to make on an application-by-application basis.
You can find a library or framework to help, keywords: ActiveRecord, ORM (Object Relational Mapper)
P.S. You have no idea the potential for soul-killing analysis paralysis and over designing you can get into. Do the simplest thing that can possibly work for your app.
Code sample for my (below) comment:
$post = new PublishedPost($data);
$edit = $post->setTitle($newTitle);
$edit->save();
This is too broad to be answered without going into epic length.
Basically, there is four prominent Data Source Architectural Patterns from Patterns of Enterprise Architecture: Table Data Gateway, Row Data Gateway, Active Record and Data Mapper. These can be found implemented in the common php frameworks in some variation. These are easy to grasp and implement.
Where it gets difficult is when you start to tackle the impedance mismatch between the database and the business objects in your application. To do so, there are a number of Object-Relational Behavioral, Structural and Metadata Mapping Patterns, like Identity Maps, Lazy Loading, Query Objects, Repositories, etc. Explaining these is beyond scope. They cover almost 200 pages in PoEAA.
What you can look at is Doctrine or Propel - the two most well known PHP ORM - that implement most of these patterns and which you could use in your application to replace your current database access handling.
Many of your worries can be answered by inspecting the existing solutions found in well-tested frameworks such as CakePHP, symfony and Zend Framework. Examining their approaches and peeking under the hood should shed light on your questions. Who knows? You may even decide to write future projects using them!
They've spent years putting their heads together to tackle these problems. Take advantage!
Checkout Doctrine:
Here is an example of a forum application using Doctrine.
http://www.doctrine-project.org/documentation/manual/1_2/en/real-world-examples#forum-application

Categories