I would like to implement facebook - like news feed for my website, with social functionalities, such as share, like, comment and post and I want to connect it to already created users (nice to have it connected with Azure Active Directory).
Is there any ready solution for this problem?
Thanks in advance!
I don't know of anything specific, and StackOverflow is not the place for generalized library recommendations. However, it should be trivial enough to implement yourself. Activity streams are composed of four main components:
Actor
Verb
Object
Target
For example: "John (actor) shared (verb) a photo (object) with Mary (target)."
Just create an entity that can track these four aspects, and then add a record describing the action each time something happens. By making certain parts foreign keys (actor/target could be foreign keys to your user table), you can then pull actions specifically related to a particular user or other object in your system.
Related
I'm trying to figure out how to create a very complex data model in Firebase database. The whole app is like a network. There are users with profiles, there are posts, comments, likes, reblogs, etc.
Now, my goal is to outline my database before I start coding it all. But here's the thing - I know that the database should be (or it's advisable to be) as flat as possible, structure should be based on the views (UIViewControllers) and it should use referencing.
The thing is that it gets very complex, especially because there's not just 1 type of a post but 9 of them. Meaning - normal text post, video post, audio post, poll post, etc. And I'm not sure how to structure those, because each post would also have comments, likes, reblogs etc. Currently, I have a global Posts object that stores ALL types of posts, but based on the post type the user has created, it's stored into each specific post type. Then I reference that in the user object so I can easily pull them out and sort them by type. But I'm not convinced this is the right way to do it or if there's a better way. I'm starting to see some nesting and that's why I'm not sure.
Here's a screenshot of the database structure (it's easier to illustrate it that way):
I'm trying to develop a trivia app, much like Quiz Up but with multi players.
Here's what I thought of doing:-
Creating a class called 'Game Session' on Parse, that has information of who created it (PFUser.current), the name of the gaming session(name), and the names of users invited(invited_users). Think of this Gaming Session as a closed group where the users interact with each other only.
So there's a createSessionViewController, and a joinSessionViewController.
If User A creates a gaming session (in createSessionViewController) and sends invites out to User B and User C, they get to accept or decline these invites in joinSessionViewController.
Now from what I have researched is that I would have to query through all the objects in the class Game Session (in viewdidload of the joinSessionViewController) and use query.wherekey for eg, User B's object id is in the column "invited_users". If so, I return that Gaming Session's object. Is that right?
If that is the case, is that an efficient way of doing it? Because it seems like if the app gets popular and there are lots of objects in the class, then it could take up a lot of time to get the one object with User B's id.
I hope I made myself clear and you guys understand my question.
PS: I'm sort of new to parse and swift, so if you could give me detailed answers it would be much appreciated.
Your logic is correct but I would also strongly suggest you take a look at Parse-LiveQuery. This tool allows you to subscribe to a PFQuery you are interested in. Once subscribed, the server will notify clients whenever a PFObject that matches the PFQuery is created or updated, in real-time.
https://github.com/ParsePlatform/parse-server/wiki/Parse-LiveQuery
https://github.com/ParsePlatform/ParseLiveQuery-iOS-OSX
Your assumption is correct and that is indeed one way you could go about doing that although it has drawbacks as you mentioned. If you felt like putting more effort into it, you can write JavaScript parse cloud code that executes after an item is saved (for example after a game session is created) and send out silent push notifications with the new objects id to the users who were invited. You could then use that push notification data to know the exact ids instead of having to query for them. This is much more advanced though. For whatever your app is, the simple route of having a model query the data on load should be fine. If you find yourself in a situation where performance is hindered due to this, well then congratulations.
I am creating a new application that allow the users to either create content in the local application database or directly on Facebook.
Imagine the user have a CRUD interface for a Post. I have a created a model for Post that sub classes ActiveRecord::Base. Objects of this class has methods for saving the post to the local database.
However, the user is also able to "tick" and option in my application that says "connect to Facebook". When it is checked the content will not be stored in my local database but it will go directly to Facebook Graph API.
The service layer and controller layer is not aware of where the data actually goes. At least this is my idea.
My question is if I can use the same Post class for both local data and Facebook data? Some of the methods in the Post class would not make sense when the post object contains data from Facebook; such as the save method.
Does that design seem stupid? Should I create another Post class that is just a normal Ruby class without sub classing ActiveRecord::Base? Or are there other better ways?
When designing a class you should make it as lean as possible. A good way to look at it is counting the nouns and verbs that are included in your model. A post can be saved or deleted, but if your save and delete start having logic related to Facebook it's a good sign that this should belong to a different class altogether.
One more note related to Facebook: the new guidelines don't allow posting 'pre-written' posts for a user. Meaning that you won't be able to make a post to a users wall without prompting him with Facebook either way.
I don't see any problems with having Post < ActiveRecord::Base - that is the standard Rails way and it does look like you should implement the standard ways of storing data to your DB and look into the Facebook posting from another angle.
There are some definite problems with that approach - the first is that you will end up with alot of tight couplings to the Facebook API. I have had tons of grief from the FB API's changing without warning or not working as documented.
Another issue is performance - loading data from FB is often painfully slow even compared to reading from a DB across the wire. It is also prone to outrages (at least in my experience).
I would definitely use "proxy objects" which are stored in your database and regularly hydrated from Facebook instead.
I have an application which is centered around data per 'team'. A user belongs to a team and if they log in they only see that team's data.
However, I now have super users who essentially belong to more than one team. These users should be able to log in to the system and then immediately choose which team they are interested in. From then on they will essentially view/create data against that selected team. They should also have the option to go and change what team they are viewing at any time.
I've established that the user would like to be able to have multiple tabs open and be viewing a different team in each tab.
I'm struggling to work out the best way to accomplish this with .NET MVC while keeping it as stateless and testable as possible.
I've been reading up on the different ways to persist data - session state and cookies seem to get a bad rep in MVC. TempData, ViewBag seem to focus on just persisting data for one request.
I wouldn't have thought that this is an uncommon requirement in an application - are there known patterns for dealing with this in MVC which I have missed?
So far I'm trying to create a partial view which I can show on each page to let the user see what team they are viewing the site as, and change it from there.
Any advice is appreciated!
If you want to let your superuser view multiple teams data then you'll want to pass the team information in on the request, on the query string or as something that looks like a restful url:
/blueteam/members
In fact it would be extra work to track this in a stateful manner as you'd have track user, team, and ui element when a superuser can view multiple team data at once.
I'd say passing the information in on every request is a pretty standard approach to your situation.
The tricky part of the stateless approach is decorating all your internal application links with the team information without too much extra work. Relative links can be your friends here. So a link to the bug page for a team might be to simply "bugs", picking up the team name higher in the uri path. If you are creating something that looks like a one page application it's easy enough to store the team info on the client.
If you don't want team members to see data for other team members, you can set up guard functions that check for team membership for certain classes of users before rendering a view.
I am using embedded documents in MongoDB for a Rails 3 app. I like that I can use embedded documents and the values are all returned with one query and there is less load on the database server. But what happens if I want my users to be able to update properties that really should be shared across documents. Is this sort of operation feasible with MongoDB or would I be better off using normal id based relations? If ID based relations are the way to go would it affect performance to a great degree?
If you need to know anything else about the application or data I would be happy to let you know what I am working with.
Document that has many properties that all documents share.
Person
name: string
description: string
Document that wants to use these properties:
Post
(references many people)
body: string
This all depends on what are you going to do with your Person model later. I know of at least one working example (blog using MongoDB) where its developer keeps user data inside comments they make and uses one collection for the entire blog. Well, ok, he uses second one for his "tag cloud" :) He just doesn't need to keep centralized list of all commenters, he doesn't care. His blog contains consolidated data from all his previous sites/blogs?, almost 6000 posts total. Posts contain comments, comments contain users, users have emails, he got "subscribe to comments" option for every user who comments some post, authorization is handled by the external OpenID service aggregator (Loginza), he keeps user email got from Loginza response and their "login token" in their cookies. So the functionality is pretty good.
So, the real question is - what are you going to do with your Users later? If really feel like you need a separate collection (you're going to let users have centralized control panels, have site-based registration, you're going to make user-centristic features and so on), make it separate. If not - keep it simple and have fun :)
It depends on what user info you want to share acrross documents. Lets say if you have user and user have emails. Does not make sence to move emails into separate collection since will be not more that 10, 20, 100 emails per user. But if user say have some big related information that always growing, like blog posts then make sence to move it into separate collection.
So answer depend on user document structure. If you show your user document structure and what you planning to move into separate collection i will help you make decision.