I'm currently building up an app for grocery-shopping where I'd want to share a set of data (shops, products, recipes and tags) within the family.
Let's say I have Entities called Shop, Product, Recipe and Tag. How can I establish an relation in CloudKit, that allows each invited user to edit shops, add products or read recipes?
I want to share all known information inside something kind of a "family store" but it seems like there's no documentation on how to do this using CloudKit and CoreData, so I hope for someone who already build sharing of a set of entities between multiple users.
I suggest setting up a Family entity in CloudKit, alongside your Shop, Product, Recipe, and Tag entities. The Family would be the parent entity, and the others would have a CKReference property that points to a Family record.
In order to coordinate sharing records between users, you could look at CKShare which is the mechanism Apple provides for sharing records from the private database (documentation).
In your case, you would share Family records between users. As long as the other records are set to have the Family record as its parent, they will automatically be shared along with the Family record's CKShare.
There is a tutorial that I like on Medium that walks through how it works which should apply pretty well to what you are trying to do: https://medium.com/#adammillers/cksharing-step-by-step-33800c8950d2
The whole workflow is more than you can shove into a Stack Overflow answer. I hope this helps get you started.
Related
I want to start a project in JEE and I need to confirm about my class diagram. I need to know if the methods used are correct and if the composition I used is correct or not.
This is my class diagram:
The project is about an online sales store, that wants to set up a management tool to sell products, and to manage its products. This tool must include the following features:
Identification module: identification of clients, managers, supervisors
Sales module: make purchases for users
Product Management Module: Adding / Deleting Products
Statistical module: visualization of sales statistics
Functional Specifications
It is necessary to act on the application, to connect to the application with a user ID and password. To facilitate its use and in order to avoid any mishandling thereafter, here is the solution:
User Profile:
The user will be able to visualize the products sold by My Online Races. The user can place an order, provided that he has registered with the site My Online Races.
Manager profile:
The manager will be able to manage the products:
Add / Edit / Delete Products
Add / Edit / Delete category
These data insertions can be made using CSV or XML files, but also through various forms on the website.
The manager will be able to view the sales statistics.
Supervisor Profile:
The supervisor can add managers whose roles are specified above.
The supervisor will be able to view the sales statistics.
The supervisor will be able to view all the actions performed by the managers, a sort of audit trail.
Well I wish to know already if you have remarks about my design. As well as I have a confusion for several methods, for example adding, modifying and deleting a product. Should I put them in the manager or product class? Is the composition I put correct or should I remove it?
Quick review of the diagram and advices
First some minor remarks about class naming: Ordered should be called Order.
The composition between Article and Order is just wrong (not from a formal view, but from the meaning it conveys). Use a normal one-to-many association: it would reflect much better the real nature of the relation between the two classes. Please take into account that a new article may exist without having been ordered, so it shoud be 0..* instead of 1..*
+belongs and +do in the middle of an association are syntactically incorect. You should use a plain triangle instead (or nothing at all). The triangle should be oriented in the reading direction Person do |> Order and Article belongs to |> Category
The methods seem ok. You do not need to add a suffix.
How shall objects be managed (created/updated/deleted) ?
A more advanced concern is not about the diagram but about how you want to organise persistence (i.e. database storage):
do you really want the object to be an active record, that is an object that adds, updates and deletes itself (to the database) ? It's simple to set up, works well, but makes the class dependent on the underlying database implementation and thus makes maintenance more difficult;
or wouldn't it be better to use a repository for each object ? In this case the repository acts as a collection that manages all the database operations. The domain object (Article, order, User, ...) then have nothing to know about the database, wich leads to more maintainable code.
But this is a broader architectural question. If it's just for a first experimental project with JEE, you can very well use the active records. It's simpler to set up. Be sure however in this case to disambiguate the Add/Update/Delete on Person, since it currently may give the impression that any person can add anyone.
Improvement of the model
A final remark, again not about the diagram itself, is about the domain. Your model considers that an Order is about a single Article.
In reality however, orders are in general about one or several articles: if this would also be the case here, your Order would become an OrderItem and the real Order would be inserted between Person and OrderItem. You could then make the relation between Order and OrderItem a composition (i.e: OrderItem is owned by Order, which has responsibility for creating its items, and the items have no sense without the related order).
I need to implement a project with CQRS, however I'm in doubt about what entities get a corresponding command and query classes.
If I have classes A, B and C, being that A is my aggregate root and the others are child entities in my aggregate, what classes should have command and query classes?
I mean, should I have a QueryA, QueryB and QueryC, or should I have only QueryA, which will bring the child data using lazy loading, for instance?
For repositories, as my understanding of the domain model, I'm considering only a RepositoryA (for my aggregate root).
Queries are not per aggregate, they are on a per view basis. For instance say you have a customer account and want to display
a list of accounts
account details with confidential info (e.g. credit card details)
account details without confidential info
This would be three queries, one for every view. And usually without such painful things like lazy loading. Either you need some piece of information for a specific view or you don't.
Commands are not per aggregate as well. You would have a command for every behavior. Like OpenAccount, CloseAccount, MergeAccounts, etc.
I´m a little confused about inheritance and relationships in core data, and I was hopping someone could drive to the right path. In my app i have created 3 entities, and none of them have (and are not suppose to have) common properties, but there´s gonna be a save and a load button for all the work that the user does. From my understanding I need to "wrap" all the entities "work" into an object which will be used to save and load, and my question is, do I need to create relationships between the entities? Because I have to relate them somehow and this is what make sense to me. Is my logic correct?
I'm implementing a budget calculator, and for the purpose of everyone understand what my issue is, I´m going to give an practical example and please correct me if my logic is incorrect:
Let´s just say you are a fruit seller, and because of that it´s normal to have a database of clients and also a fruit database with the kinds of fruit you sell. From my understanding I find two entities here:
Client with properties named: name, address, phone, email, etc.
Stock with properties named: name, weight, stock, cost, supplier, etc.
TheBudget with properties named: name, amount, type, cost, delivery, etc.
I didn´t put all the properties because I think you get the point. I mean as you can see, there´s only two properties I could inherit; the rest is different. So, if I was doing a budget for a client, I can have as many clients I want and also the amount of stock, but what about the actual budget?
I´m sorry if my explanation was not very clear, but if it was..what kind of relationships should I be creating? I think Client and TheBudget have a connection. What do you advise me?
That's not entirely correct, but some parts are on the right track. I've broken your question down into three parts: relationships, inheritance and the Managed Object Context to hopefully help you understand each part separately:
Relationships
Relationships are usually used to indicate that one entity can 'belong' to another (i.e. an employee can belong to a company). You can setup multiple one-to-many relationships (i.e. an employee belongs to a company and a boss) and you can setup the inverse relationships (which is better described with the word 'owns' or 'has', such as 'one company has many employees).
There are many even more complicated relationships depending on your needs and a whole set of delete rules that you can tell the system to follow when an entity in a relationship is deleted. When first starting out I found it easiest to stick with one-to-one and one-to-many relationships like I've described above.
Inheritance
Inheritance is best described as a sort of base template that is used for other, more specific entities. You are correct in stating that you could use inheritance as a sort of protocol to define some basic attributes that are common across a number of entities. A good example of this would be having a base class 'Employee' with attributes 'name', 'address' and 'start date'. You could then create other entities that inherit from this Employee entity, such as 'Marketing Rep', 'HR', 'Sales Rep', etc. which all have the common attributes 'name', 'address' and 'start date' without creating those attributes on each individual entity. Then, if you wanted to update your model and add, delete or modify a common attribute, you could do so on the parent entity and all of its children will inherit those changes automatically.
Managed Object Context (i.e. saving)
Now, onto the other part of your question/statement: wrapping all of your entities into an object which will be used to save and load. You do not need to create this object, core data uses the NSManagedObjectContext (MOC for short) specifically for this purpose. The MOC is tasked with keeping track of objects you create, delete and modify. In order to save your changes, you simply call the save: method on your MOC.
If you post your entities and what they do, I might be able to help make suggestions on ways to set it up in core data. You want to do your best to setup as robust a core data model as you can during the initial development process. The OS needs to be able to 'upgrade' the backing store to incorporate any changes you've made between your core data model revisions. If you do a poor job of setting up your core data model initially and release your code that way, it can be very difficult to try and make a complicated model update when the app is in the wild (as you've probably guessed, this is advice born out of painful experience :)
I've got a data model where there is a Person entity, which has a transformable attribute which is an array of dictionaries containing information. The model is much bigger than that, this is just the part I'm having trouble with. It was designed this way by an old developer, and in taking over the project I need to migrate this to be 100% core data.
So what I need to do is create a new entity, then step through each dictionary in the Person's array and create new instances of that entity with the information from that dictionary. I thought I could use an NSEntityMigrationPolicy to set up a custom migration for this new Entity, but it seems the Core Data migration is expecting X number of source entities to translate to X number of destination entities. Because I technically have 0 source entities right now (because they're in an array that Core Data doesn't really know anything about), I'm not sure how I can make the migration create new entities during the process.
What, or rather where in the migration procedure, is the best way to do what I'm trying to accomplish? I've always used lightweight migration in the past, so this is my first adventure in custom migration.
It would help to have a sense of your data model (schema) - but let's assume that your Person entity now holds home address and list of favorite restaurants. And let's further assume that you will be creating new entities Address and Restaurant along with the following relationships:
Person has one Address, so there's a to-one relationship from Person to Address called "homeAddress". There's an inverse to-many relationship from Address to Person, because many people could live at the same address.
Person has a to-many relationship (called restaurants) to Restaurants. Restaurant could also has a to-many relationship to Person (though this might be one of those cases where bidirectionality doesn't really make sense).
Anyway, the point is that now - in addition to your PersonToPerson NSEntityMigrationPolicy subclass, you will also have PersonToAddress and PersonToRestaurant. These will be the places that you unpack the old data and use it to instantiate and initialize new Address and Restaurant objects.
Of course, there are lots of other complicating issues. For example, you won't want to be creating a new instance of the same Restaurant for every Person who likes it. You will need to keep track of newly created Restaurants.
You will want to order your mappings strategically - probably with PersonToPerson first.
You might want to look at Marcus Zarra's Core Data sample code and maybe even buy his book.
I'm working a pretty standard e-commerce web site where there are Products and Categories. Each product has an associated category, which is a simple name-value pair object used to categorise a product (e.g. item 1234 may have a category "ballon").
I modelled the product as a root aggregate, which owns and knows how to modify it's category, which is an entity.
However, I ran into a problem where a user needs to be able to search a category. How am I supposed to implement this in DDD? I'm new to DDD but I believe that only root aggregates should be given it's own repository. So that leaves me with 2 options:
Add "SearchCategory" method to the ProductRepository
Implement the search logic as service (i.e. CategoryFinderService)
I personally think option 2 is more logical but it feels weird to have a service that touches database. Somehow I feel that only repository should be allowed to interact with database.
Can someone please tell me what's the best way to implement this?
IMHO, in your Domain Model, Category should not be child of the Product Aggregation. The Product has a Category, but it does not know how to create or edit a Category.
Take this another example. Imagine the ShoppingCart class, it's an aggregate root and contains a list of Items. The ShoppingCart is responsible for adding/editing/removing the Items, in this case you won't need a Repository for the Item class.
Not sure by the way, I'm new to this just like you.
Placing something You don't know where to put into artificial services usually leads to anemic domain model.
I would go with first option. But need for entities without context of root is a sign that You might lack another root.
Don't try to implement everything with your domain model. The domain model is powerful for changing the state of the system, but unnecessary complex for querying. So separate the two. It's called Command Query Responsibility Segregation, or CQRS. And no, it has nothing to do with Event Sourcing, even though they do work nicely together.
I implement scenarios such as this so that I have a domain logic side with the domain objects and repositories (if needed), which do the state changing when something happens, i.e. new order is placed or order is shipped. But when I just need to show something in the UI, for instance the list of the products filtered by the category, it is a simple query and does not involve the domain objects at all. It simply returns Data Transfer Objects (DTO) that do not contain any domain logic at all.