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 6 years ago.
Improve this question
In most ASP.NET Mvc tutorials, you see people creating simple models and then scaffolding controllers with views, using Entity Framework.
In most tutorials you will also see that they create a new DbContext class which will have the DbSets. I understand that this is a good thing to do for educational purpose, to help the person understand how it works.
But the account system that comes with a default Mvc project always links to "DefaultConnection".
Some tutorials will also make use of the account system to advance further, but that means that at this point you would have 2 databases running to support your web app.
one for the account info
one for the details of your model(s)
Is this the correct way to work? or do most developers/companies just use 1 database for both of these?
My reason for asking is because i found this tutorial which uses both of these aspects and works on 1 database and it is the first time i see this being done.
There's no right or wrong way. You need to evaluate the requirements and time lines for your projects and decide which options suits you best.From personal experience, in all the projects I worked on, the account info and the models reside on the same database.
Remember that if you have two databases you will need to create two data contexts to access them.If the database needs to be moved to another server, you would need to move two databases and change the connection string in two places, also the maintainance and upkeep on the DB would need to be performed in two different places.It's really a maintainance headache and should be avoided in my opinion unless your requirements have some compelling reason that you should place account info into a separate DB.
Related
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 2 days ago.
Improve this question
What are your experiences with .Net Core and migrations in real life applications? I've heard from people who don't think much of Migrations with entity framework. On the other hand, Microsoft seems to be pushing this approach.
I'm working in a project with several databases and maybe 50-60 tables with thousands of datasets. And these are constantly changing.
Maybe I am a little unexperienced with Entity Framework (with .Net Framework, so not with the new version), but I used it a few times and, overall, I do not like it.
On one hand, is very easy to create the database model and you have an history of your changes. Also, to get the data is very easy too.
But, on the other hand, managing migration history is a pain on the neck. Also, it can block a new migration to your database, blocking your progress and, if you work with more people, and you do separated migrations before merging the code, is too hard to merge the two migrations and usually you need to reestructurate the migration history to merge or create a new one deleting the others.
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 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm a bit new in rails development I'm modeling a website with few resources and so far so good. But here is my question:
I would like to allow the admin users to manage information show in most of the pages: Application name, telephone number, address, default email and this kind of things.
My current idea is make a model Property with name and value, but somehow I'm not convinced about this approach because I'll need to access the database to get this values for every request.
Thanks everyone for your time! :D
This seems like an OK approach. If you implement caching, it no longer will hit the db with every request, and honestly it probably isn't really that big of a deal even without the caching. Build it the way you need, and optimize afterward, if necessary.
With all this being said, it may be worth considering how much things like the phone number are going to change, and balance the cost of developing a dynamic solution against the time it would take to change once, 3 years from now (if the number ever does change), in a partial.
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 9 years ago.
Improve this question
You can find thousands of questions out there about how you develop software and which methodology is the best one. But mainly these are targeting medium to large teams, with people having different roles and responsibilities.
What I'm interested in is what methodology are you using for your one-man-shows? What steps are you doing, what documents are you creating to get the things you want to develop clear and document it well, to share it with the community?
Especially, I’m interested in the following questions:
_Are you using a structured approach even you’re developing on your own or no at all?
_What phases are you using?
_Which documents are you writing before and after coding?
And if you have “your” standardized approach, can you share templates which you are using?
Thanks in advance,
cheers
Gerry
Personally I think it is a matter of making decisions when it comes to the development process (solo). In my case I wouldn't recommend setting up a massive development process but I would pick elements which prevent problems that I have earlier had. My approach for small applications (in the right order):
Always write down what you are going to make and what you are not going to make (define a scope) - Think of functional requirements (Functional Design)
(OO only) Make a class diagram that displays relations between classes. (Technical Design - Sequence diagrams, while usefull, take up massive amounts of time to make)
Write your program according to what you have just written down (or part of it).
Refactor and redesign your application (once in every X hours, write this one down)
Repeat step 3 to 4 until the result is what you wrote in the Functional Design.
Walk through every corner of your application to find every single path and write this down in a testdocument. Identify possible problems in the paths and test them.
When it comes to big applications however (or assignments for someone else) I prefer using the "medium to large teams" approach. Which almost brings a guarantee that you will not be meeting most problems.
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 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I am new to Grails. I have noticed that most tutorials show queries being created and stored in the Controller. It seems like this could really bloat the controller over time, especially as queries grow in greater number and complexity.
In my research, I read that controllers should stay as lean as possible (having to do with requesting and submitting data to/from the model/view, and that heavy querying is discouraged.
How have you gone about creating, storing, and calling queries for your Grails application?
There's a good article about Grails best practices here. According to the post:
Don’t allow the controller to take over another role. The role of a
controller is to accept incoming requests, check permissions etc, ask
a domain or a service for a result, give the result back to the
requester in the desired format such as HTML, JSON, or XML. Keep the
controller as thin as possible. Don’t perform business logic, queries,
or updates within controllers.
So if you have a more complex logic, I suggest you to build services:
A service is the right candidate for complex business logic or coarse
grained code. If required, the service API can easily be exposed as a
RESTful/SOAP web service.
This is what Services are for.
Put all of your domain manipulation logic in services, and limit your controllers to the role of "middle-man" - bind and validate the request parameters, invoke the service, and render the results.
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 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm about to start building a Rails app that will eventually need to vary CRUD access by user (i.e. which pages do they see, which can they edit, etc).
Is there a best stage of the development cycle to incorporate this?
Part of me feels like it should be the very first thing, since almost every piece of the interface will in some way rely on checking the user's ID, and it will be an inherent part of the DB structure.
Another part feels that this would overcomplicate things to start out with, and that I should instead build the core parts of the app, then layer on the authentication/authorization later.
Are there any best practices around this sort of thing?
I would say that if your system will rely on some kind of authentication... Why wait?
Let's say that you start developing your application without the authentication layer but at the same time you know that at some point you will have to do it. That means that at some point you will develop the authentication layer, and most likely you will have to refactor what you have already built to adapt it to this new layer.
Also, to try to convince you a little bit more...When you say:
I should instead build the core parts of the app
You should consider that the authentication module might be a core part of the app too...
I prefer to do it early, but you really have roughly the same amount of work in front of you regardless of when you do it. It really a matter of opinion on when you prefer to do it.