I've never worked with MVC design pattern before and recently I started to work on the project using ASP.NET MVC.
I'm using ActiveRecord as my data layer.
I'm also using view models (unique for each view) and AutoMapper to map my view models to EntityFramework entities.
In a few days reseaching about MVC, EntityFramework and reading different articles I came up with the following design:
In my solution I have Web project (Presentation Layer) which contains Views and Controllers.
I have Core project where I define my ViewModels and Services (Business layer where all business logic goes)
I have EntityModels project where all me EF entities live (Data layer)
This design allows me to keep my Data layer separate from my Presentation layer, Web project doesn't know anything about EntityModels project and vise versa, all the logic lives in business layer.
From my controllers (after validation checks) I pass viewModels to Service layer where mapping and all necessary busines logic is executed.
Is this design correct at all?
My consern is that I've read that ViewModels should be defined in Presentation Layer. I saw examples where Presentation Layer has references to Data layer and mapping is done in controllers (good practice?). in this case controllers pass domain models to business layer. I don't have any experience here but I don't like it.
So, can anyone point out where I'm right and where wrong?
thanks in advance.
Overall the architecture looks good. The decision on where to place you view models hinges on one factor in my opinion.
Do you plan to have other clients in the future that may benefit from reusing those view models (iPad, Android, etc.)?
If so, definitely keep them out of the MVC assembly and put them in their own assembly. Otherwise, you're safe putting them in the MVC app as long as you're ok with moving them and changing code if you ever decide to make a second client.
For the record, I always put my view models in their own assembly. It doesn't take more time up front, but it pays dividends down the road if things change.
FWIW, I am doing the same thing - but I am new to MVC, so not 100% sure I'm on the right path also. But, it just "feels right", which more often than not tells me it is correct.
The only thing I would add is that I use automapper (automapper.org), which almost eliminates the overhead of having the layers. Definitely check it out IMO.
I have to say the only thing that doesnt feel 100% correct is that with this pattern, we are creating a whole lot of ViewModels -> one per View. I assume you mean that Create, Index, Update, Details for each domain entity EACH have their own ViewModel? Or are you sharing one ViewModel between the views?
Lastly, I dont buy jfars argument that it creates lots of complexity/build time. At the very least, it conceptually separates the layers that much more. It strikes me as a much better job of separating the concerns, with very little overhead.
I have a pipe dream of reusing the viewmodels for a silverlight implementation, but havent really thought that one through yet. But it makes sense that if you do a good job of factoring out all "non-UI" code into the viewmodels and services, then doing a new UI should be "trivial", right? we'll see :-)
Related
I have some questions after reading an article called Layered Application Guidelines (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee658109.aspx).
For example, I have an ASP.NET MVC application. In my application I have some Entities (Models), Repositories, UnitOfWork and DbContext. And some Views and Controllers as well.
How to split them into layers according to an article above?
As far as I understand, Views and (maybe) Controllers reside in a Presentation Layer. Entities (Models) in Business Layer and Repositories, UnitOfWork and DbContext in Data Layer.
Am I right or mistaken? I'm very-very unsure about it.
Thanks in advance!
Views and Controllers should reside in the presentation layer. Your models should also reside in the presentation layer. Models reflect a view model that is used for presentation only. Entities should represent data and should not be sent to the View. In the presentation later, the models should be populated from the entities. You are correct in that your DbContext and UnitOfWork should be in the data layer.
The way the layers are separated will depend on the scope of your application. For a small one, Areas may suffice. For a larger project, or a project which may become large, you should look into creating separate solutions for each layer. This is known as an n-tier approach, and can be seen when looking at the excellent example at http://prodinner.codeplex.com/.
View models/Views/Controllers - presentation layer
Entities - business layer
The repository mediates between the data source layer and the business layers of the application
The DbContext Represents a combination of the Unit-Of-Work and Repository patterns, so if you are implementing a repository and unit of work on top of it could mean that you should consider to limit your abstractions. (This last point may not apply in your case, I couldn't say without knowing more about your design).
Entity Framework entities (along with the framework) are your data layer. In many applications they also become part of your business layer - and it is debatable whether or not this is good (I personally don't like that, but when you abstract it with say the repository model there is a good argument that you are losing some of the benefits provided by EF).
Depending on how you separate out your code (and it sounds like you are using the repository pattern) you may have a repositories containing some business logic, or have a services layer as well (my preference for 3 tier applications) where business logic (mostly) happens.
I would argue that you should be considering View Models as well as part of your presentation model - but if you are using MVC and data-annotations (which are excellent for this job) to validate your model you have just piled a bunch of business logic in to them.
The most important place to prevent business logic from creeping into is your presentation layer, and most importantly your Views and Controllers. The approach to how you structure the rest of your application depends heavily on the framework you choose, the scale of your application and the deployment structure of the application.
So to be as clear as possible this is what I do*:
Views <--Presentation layer only
Controllers <--Presentation layer only (might end up with slightly 'fat' controller in some instances, e.g. .NET Membership login)
View Models <--Presentation layer, but if doing validations here often business rules are also being tested.
Service Layer <--Business Layer if used
Repositories <--Could be Data layer only, or mix of business layer. If you do the repository pattern try and avoid exposing your DbSets directly, as this immediately defeats the abstraction you are attempting to provide (potential exceptions to this, e.g. - .Net Membership)
Entities <--Data layer, possibly with also business logic depending on how you structure your application.
*Not to be taken as authoritative
I'm new to asp.net MVC and EF, so excuse me if my question is not clear or easy.
I have read some tutorials about EF Code-First approach and now I'm trying this tutorial Getting Started with EF using MVC.
Using Code-First approach I'm using the POCO classes to define my DB model, DB logic, DB validation, UI validation and some UI logic. So I can use these classes(or objects) in my presentation layer or use them as JSON objects when dealing with Web-Services(or in JavaScript code).
My question: Isn't that mixing some logic together? I mean shouldn't I use like special view-model classes for presentation and these classes should have the UI logic and validation ?!
Is it good practice to send the POCO object to the view(or to the client in general) ?
Finally i need some guidance on how to organize my project layers or folders? I see many ways and I'm confused about what to choose or what format I should base my own on?!!
You should not use your data entities in higher layers of your application. Transform/compose/copy data from DAL into view model or business classes using a library like Automapper. This keeps the layers of your application independent and hides your database schema from end users.
Keep in mind that MVC is only concerned with presentation, all real work should happen in other layers of your app. I try to keep layers independent and use a little bit of glue code to bundle them into an app. I may write data access and business logic layers when working on MVC project, but then re-use in a command line utility. There are a lot of books that talk about writing quality code. I personally found Clean Code, Code Complete 2, and Design Patterns extremely helpful.
As LeffeBrune said, is bad practice to show directly your data entities to the presentation layer, you can try to expose some interfaces in form of project services that return the view model to the controller. This can help to keep the layers separate, and implement Unit of Work pattern and some other cool stuff.
You can start reading the Scott Millet Book
ASP.NET Design Patterns
for a starting point in designing a good layered application, here his blog.
You can define interfaces in your business layer which your EF entities can implement; the business logic doesn't know about the actual implementation. To do this you need the data layer to reference the business layer which means you're inverting the dependencies - you then use an IoC container to bind the interfaces to their implementations. ...but yeah that's one of many, many ways to go about it.
The thing is, with single responsibility in mind, your entities shouldn't worry about UI stuff - this can mean your interfaces also need to be implemented by "view model" classes, which implement things like validation and other business & presentation concerns.
Your questions require a lot of discussions.
Choosing infrastructure for your project is a complicated issue that depends on lots of factors. There are some design patterns that address different requirements in a project which involve you or your team in multiple concepts and technologies. I recommend you two valuable resources that help you understanding software architecture focused on .Net technologies.
CSLA.NET : The CSLA .NET framework is an application development framework that reduces the cost of building and maintaining applications. Rockford Lhotka, createor of CSLA.NET, has some books that deeply describe an optimal infrastructure of a project; all of your questions have answered in his books.
Microsoft Spain - Domain Oriented N-Layered .NET 4.0 Sample App: the project/sample is willfully restricted to .NET implementation of most used patterns in N-Layered Domain Oriented Architectures based on simple scenarios easy to understand (Customers, Orders, Bank Transfers, etc.). The project/sample is very well documented and all of your questions , also, have answered in the project.
All in all, view-models, POCOs, layers, etc. are concepts that have root in software architecture and I believe that they can not be described in short.
What I normally use is a POCO layer to use in my data access and a view model layer to use in my views just as LeffeBrune said.
All my layers use POCOs and the controllers are responsible to construct the view model that each view needs.
To get this work more automated I use automapper.
So my solution structure gets usually to be like this:
Model (POCO)
Data access (NHibertante)
Service (Business Layer)
Web (UI)
ViewModel
I'm building a MVC4 app, I've used EF5 model first, and kept it pretty simple. This isn't going to a huge application, there will only ever be 4 or 5 people on it at once and all users will be authenticated before being able to access any part of the application, it's very simply a place order - dispatcher sees order - dispatcher compeletes order sort of application.
Basically my question is do I need to be worrying about repositories and ViewModels if the size and scope of my application is so small. Any view that is strongly typed to a domain entity is using all of the properties within that entity. I'm using TryOrUpdateModel in my controllers and have read some things saying this can cause a lot of problems, but not a lot of information on exactly what those problems can be. I don't want to use an incredibly complicated pattern for a very simple app.
Hopefully I've given enough detail, if anyone wants to see my code just ask, I'm really at a roadblock here though, and could really use some advice from the community. Thanks so much!
ViewModels: Yes
I only see bad points when passing an EF Entities directly to a view:
You need to do manual whitelisting or blacklisting to prevent over-posting and mass assignment
It becomes very easy to accidentally lazy load extra data from your view, resulting in select N+1 problems
In my personal opinion, a model should closely resembly the information displayed on the view and in most cases (except for basic CRUD stuff), a view contains information from more than one Entity
Repositories: No
The Entity Framework DbContext already is an implementation of the Repository and Unit of Work patterns. If you want everything to be testable, just test against a separate database. If you want to make things loosely coupled, there are ways to do that with EF without using repositories too. To be honest, I really don't understand the popularity of custom repositories.
In my experience, the requirements on a software solution tend to evolve over time well beyond the initial requirement set.
By following architectural best practices now, you will be much better able to accommodate changes to the solution over its entire lifetime.
The Respository pattern and ViewModels are both powerful, and not very difficult or time consuming to implement. I would suggest using them even for small projects.
Yes, you still want to use a repository and view models. Both of these tools allow you to place code in one place instead of all over the place and will save you time. More than likely, it will save you copy paste errors too.
Moreover, having these tools in place will allow you to make expansions to the system easier in the future, instead of having to pour through all of the code which will have poor readability.
Separating your concerns will lead to less code overall, a more efficient system, and smaller controllers / code sections. View models and a repository are not heavily intrusive to implement. It is not like you are going to implement a controller factory or dependency injection.
I am looking for some guidance on how to incorporate business rules into an asp.net mvc application and how they relate to the model.
First a little background so we know what kind of solutions are relative for this question. At work we use WinForms, MVP, BusinessObjects, DataAccessObjects, and DataTransferObjects. The boundaries of the layers use DTOs to send parameters to methods and as return types, or return List types.
Right now we are adding a facade layer to translate the DTOs into Domain Objects for the UI to work with, since the architect does not like how using DTOs in the PresentationLayer is working currently. I am comfortable about all of this in theory aside from it being practical or not.
I am making a website for fun, but for considerations lets say it serves the same amount of traffic as SO, something like 60,000 hits a month last I heard. I am comfortable with the mechanics of the controllers and the views, and how the model integrates with the two.
I am using NerdDinner as a sample for building the site and I follow the Repository pattern implementation in the examples. What I don't get is how to incorporate business objects into the mix.
I hear people talk about LINQ as the DataAccessLayer/DataAccessObjects. If I force all of my requests though the business objects as I am used to I have introduced some weird dependencies. Both my UI and my BO have to know about my DAO.
What would kind of make sense is to use the LINQ classes as a true DAO layer, hide it behind the BO, and have the BO transform between POCO and LINQ objects.
My only concern there is I am fine with binding my UI to LINQ classes, and don't really need all the extra work, I am happy with a thin lightweight approach as in NerdDinner.
So what I have essentially is the Repository that is instantiated in the controllers that takes and return LINQ objects. My business objects have static methods that just take LINQ classes and perform some calculation, say apply a certain states tax %, or w/e.
Since a lot of these calculations have to be done across the results of the repository I am thinking of combining them into one central area, like a facade layer, but one that just does transforms against the data and not translating to other objects sets (DomainObjects <-> DTOs).
Should I do that, or should I say that those business methods really are part of my model and that they should be in the repository methods that return the objects?
From a design standpoint I would design it like this. Of course naming is just for the purpose of this post you don't have to name your DAL and BLL ..Repository and ..Service.
Have repositories (or one) where your data access/queries should be happening. It should ideally just contain queries (compiled or not). I personally have a repository for each data type to help keep queries separated.
The next layer should be your business layer which I like to call services. These classes are responsible for all logic regarding validation, prep steps and anything else needed to be done to get the consumer of the service the information it needs. As with an ASP.NET MVC app I have my services return view models which are then directly passed into strongly-typed views. With my services I usually group them logically together instead of one for each data type.
This is a great design because it keeps your data access code and presentation code nice and thin and most of the logic where things can go wrong is in your service (or business) layer.
My controllers turn over the request to the appropriate service. The Service then makes calls to various Repositories. Repositories use Linq to Sql Entities purely for DataAccess and then map and return as Domain Objects. The service then decides what the Controller will present and replaces the DO with Presentation objects which are returned to the Controller to display in View.
SO I have Services-Repositories-Domain Objects- Presentation Objects
I am asking because it seems like i have a lot of objects, some not doing anything but passing data. Is this a reasonable scenairo or am i not following proper MVC pattern?
Yes, you've got the right idea. It can be a lot of classes and interfaces (not even counting the unit tests and mock/test classes) but if you have a decent sized application, you're libel to have many anyway. But to start out, it's a lot of work for not much initial gain.
I have seen projects skip the some of the services implementations for basic services that just pass through to the repository without any value added by the service. They go straight to the repository from the controller and don't seem to lose much.
There are other ways to ease the burden of some classes by using tools where possible. For example, projects like AutoMapper can help streamline your domain object to view model mappings.
If your application is big enough, your pattern makes sense. Otherwise, I smell overengineering...
Ask yourself: what if this layer didn't exist and you'll find out if it's true or not.
I had a very similar scenario. Initially my project had UI, Controllers, Service Layer and Repositories. My unit tests covered both the service layer and repositories (filters) and in some cases the unit tests were doing the same thing (as the service layer was sometimes a pass through to the repositories).
Due to a large refactor I cut out the service layer and this gave me a lot of flexibility with the Controllers dealing directly with the Repositories and applying Filters to get exactly what I want.
One problem I ran into was you cannot Serialize Linq2Sql objects and therefore sometimes had to translate these object to presentation objects.