CRUD part of app in DDD\ES\CQRS - domain-driven-design

I would like to use DDD\CQRS\ES in my project. I just started using it so I don’t have a lot of experience. I am aware of existing core domain, supporting domain and CRUD domain. My core domain have references to CRUD data. For example There are a lot of business rules in Order, but it contain basic information about Delivering Company, receiving point etc.
These informations are managed by admin. In my opinion I should use crud approach but what happen when I need to rollback events?
System is going to store mix of data – restored from event source and actual from crud part of app. I will end up with inconsistent data. For example, The order may be maintained by not existing company ( That company was deleted by admin when their have delivered package, but after rollback order is still active)
In every project is part of CRUD data so how do you deal with this problem?
Should I store company events?
Additionally, When I’m adding new order I should send company name and id via event because when Im rebuilding my ReadStore , there may not be company in database so I can’t get companyName from repository
PS. Do you know any CRUD framework to handle with simples CRUD operations?
PS.2 Do you know any example opensource project which containt CRUD part of app in ES\CQRS approach?
Ok. Maybe I described it too complicated. I just want to know:
how to implement the simplest part of application ( poor business
logic - mainly CRUD operations) when I store my core domain in
event store and I would like to be able to revert previous state of
my core domain
Should I store crud operation in event store too or not?
How provide data consistent after rollback event store?
Which CRUD framework do you recommend for Java applications?

I think this is a common problem when dealing with DDD and especially when dealing with ES. This might sound simple but what you need to look for are the bounded contexts in your domain. Turns out that this bounded contexts map very well onto the services from SOA. Now when you get to SOA you realise that not all the services ( service as the S in SOA not as in web/windows service ) need to be implemented the same.
In my experience you are always going to have some services dealing mostly with CRUD operations and very little business logic, usually consumed by apps that are used by admins/special users. This services can and should be implemented with the least effort possible, without CQRS and ES and without over complicating them. Just make sure they publish relevant messages when something happens.
I strongly recommend Eric Evans - what i've learned about DDD since the book video.
Also Udi Dahan has some very very good videos about SOA and what SOA means: Avoid a failed SOA and Udi on SOA
I realise this is not actually answering all the details of your question, but i hope it will point you in the right direction.

Why not simply treat the CRUD part as append only (maybe allow update if you must) or copy enough data into the event such that important data isn't lost?

I don't what exactly your trying to ask, but if it concerns DDD and CRUD operations, the Cocktail framework might help you although i haven't tried it my self.

Related

How to classify services in microservices?

I am new in microservices. I am coming from monolithic background in current environment i have different kinds services for different purposes like search, file, email, notification. I have taken so many courses but in that the instructor separate each entity and make it's own database also create API for that(like separate shopping cart entity, product entity) it makes no sense, I am not getting what is real world use of microservices or how to make separate component to build it's own microservice.
Can anyone give Real Project example?
Thanks in advance
Read this and this. Also look here and here. I don't think that anyone will give a link to the real working project, so you can try this.
I am not getting what is real world use of microservices
mostly as you heard in all of those tutorials the microservices architecture leverage advantages of:
the smaller services are easy to maintain and develop
easily can scale specific services rather than the whole project(monolith). for example you scale service-1 to 4 instances that request traffic split into these 4 instance and service-2 to 2 instances and go on (load balance). and these services may distributed in to different servers and locations.
if one service failed to work it does not terminate the whole system since they are independent.
services can be reusable for other scenarios or features.
small team can works for each services and its easy to manage both project and development flow.
and also it suffer from disadvantages of
services are simple and small but all as a whole system is complex so designing part are very critical.
poor performance and it requires do some extras to improve the performance (different types of caching on different levels).
transactions are complex and its developments are time costly. imagine simple update should be projected to other services if its required and you have to consider failure and rollback strategy ( SAGA ).
how to make separate component to build it's own microservice
this is the most challenging part of microservices. you need deep study on Domain driven design DDD.
Decompose by subdomain
Decompose by Business Capabilities
Can anyone give Real Project example?
there are many projects the develop microservices with different patterns. I think you have to start your own and make your hands dirty.

Learning DDD and CQRS

I'm new to DDD and CQRS and I'm planning to build a simple application to improve my skills a bit.
What I'm planning to do is a simple Taxi Corp application.
Requirements:
Client orders a taxi.
Client can have only one order at a time.
Driver picks an order.
Driver can have only one order at a time.
Driver goes to client.
Client enters cab.
Course starts.
Course finishes.
Client is purchased and driver is paid
And so on.
I can see there can be three aggregates: Client, Order and Driver. I want to split them into separate microservices. Do you think it's a good idea or I should start with one microservice?
I'm currently focused on the ordering a taxi. First of all I need to check if client doesn't already have a course assigned, later on I can create an order. After the order is created, I need to assign it to client. As during one request only one aggregate can be updated/created I wonder how to do it correctly. I've read something about Process Managers and I think it will be very useful in this case. I even draw a schema of communication. Can anyone tell me if my approach is correct and give me some tips on how to going further?
Process of creating an order
Do you think it's a good idea or I should start with one microservice?
I refer you to the wisdom of John Gall
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.
Instead of worrying about microservices, give your attention to messages.
Someone said: "If you have more microservices than customers, you are doing it wrong".
And if you really follow CQRS/ES approach, resulting system is much easier to split apart than traditional ORM monolyths.
So focus on the domain first and start with monolyth.
start with the microservices design even in a wrong way, you get a better insight into desired architecture. because problems in microservices architecture design show themselves very soon.
client and driver are both users of systems and have some commonalities so you can consider them as one domain and one micro-service for them.
consider an order manager micro-service to assign client and driver to a trip by their ids. the order database may include trips table with two id keys for driver-Id and client-Id and some columns for the different states. after finishing each trip you can remove it from the trip table and insert that in an archive table. also, you can leave it there and partition your table daily to keep your database performance high.
consider an accounting micro-service for keeping payments and transactions. It's ok if you opt to use NoSql databases for other microservices, but do use SQL database for your transactions.
you may need another microservice for reporting and dashboards. mirror other dbs in a new one for reporting.
you also need an API gateway to route requests to micro-services or do authentication
your process is a set of events. definitely, you will expand the system later on and perhaps will have some long-running tasks, better to have a message broker and implement your flow as an event/task flow using patterns like event sourcing.
I can see there can be three aggregates: Client, Order and Driver. I
want to split them into separate microservices. Do you think it's a
good idea or I should start with one microservice?
They all belong to the same bounded context. Bounded context translates nicely to microservices (see Eric Evans video: https://www.infoq.com/news/2015/06/dddx-microservices-boundaries). But don't start by designing a micro service, you are doing it in the wrong order. Design first your bounded context then if it makes sense create a micro service around the hexagonal architecture.
After the order is created, I need to assign it to client. As during
one request only one aggregate can be updated/created I wonder how to
do it correctly.
This is the perfect example of why you need to do it all in the same process.
But in the case you want to go multiple micro services, think of eventual consistency (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eventual_consistency) and create a message driven architecture between your services. Might be too much work in my opinion but for learning purpose can be a good idea.

Integration of bounded contexts locally

In "Implementing Domain-Driven Design", Vernon give detailed examples for integrating bounded context with a messaging or REST based solution, it also mention database integration, but I understand it is not a very clean solution to share database or at least db tables between BC.
But what if the 2 BCs I want to integrate are hosted locally on the same server, is it really a good idea to use a messaging/rest/rpc solution ? (which seems more suitable for a remotely hosted BC to me)
Otherwise, except with DB integration, what are the other alternatives ? Hosting both BC in the same process and calling it directly (still using adapters and translators for clean seperation) ?
Thanks
You could look into using something like 0MQ for inter-process communication on the same server. I've also in the past just hosted things in the same process as you suggest and just used interfaces / in-memory messaging to separate out contexts.
Everything is about trade-offs in the end, so you just need to decide what level of isolation you are willing to accept. The simplest solution would be to separate inside a solution via folders and interfaces, the other end of the spectrum being completely separate servers.
I don't think that location should come into play w.r.t. integration between BCs.
There really are other factors to consider such as guaranteed delivery to the recipient in order to ensure that the processing takes place. This should be required whether or not the two BCs are hosted on the same server.
Another reason to ignore location is that when you need to scale, your architecture should be able to handle it from the get-go.
As tomliversidge mentioned it is possible to use some deployment mechanisms such as non-durable messaging to speed up things but there will definitely be a trade-off and that has to be a conscious decision.

Where do application behavior related componenets fit in with DDD?

If I am developing an application using DDD, where do the infrastrucure and behavior components go? For example, user management, user specific configuration, permissions, application menuing, etc.
These components really have nothing to do with the business requirements being fullfilled by my domain, but they are still required elements of my application. Many of them also require persistance.
It's pretty normal to have non-domain components along with the domain in your project - after all not everything is business domain oriented. Where they belong actually depends on how you structure your solution. In most cases I tend to follow Onion Architecture, so all of my logic is provided by Application Services, regardless if it's domain or non-domain oriented.
Well if you find that your usecases rarely demands information from your core domain joined with application specific, you can probably split that into a separate database. Access this information through Application Service layer, since this layer is suppose to serve your application needs. If that includes user profile persistence etc, that's fine.
But you remember that if you got infrastructural failure and you want to do a rollback with some transaction logs or database backups, you'd probably want all persisted data be roll-backed. So then it's easier to have these domains share a database. Pros and cons - always compromise...
If I know that this application would have minor interaction with it's environment, I would put this in one database and let the application service layer interact with clients.
If I know that there will be several applications/clients I may consider to split database so that Webb application user specifics are stored in separate database. Very hard to say, since I have no overview of all the requirements.
/Magnus

Saas model data isolation

I curently have an application writen in php using the symfony framework. Rather than have seperate installs for customer on a hosted server, I would like to move to as SaaS model with one install for all customers posible running of google code or another cloud based service. I am not tied to PHP though i would like to have the benifits of a good framework.
So the chalenge: If all customers are using the same application we then have fin a way isolating each customers data. Customers do for eample have admin access and can manager their own users and privlages. At a simplistic leve you could just have a organisation identifier in each table take and add that to all database operations. However most application framewors use and ORM of some kind, and I have not been able to find one that will easly / seemlesly facinatate this at a leve the has minimum impact on the application code.
Has anyone looked at this, are there any good aproaches to this problem?
As Itay says, a multi-tenant system is a common requirement. A while back I was doing some research on this problem and came across a pretty good presentation on the different ways to handle this issue, and the pros and cons of each: http://aac2009.confreaks.com/06-feb-2009-14-30-writing-multi-tenant-applications-in-rails-guy-naor.html
This particular presentation is targeted to a Rails audience, but the principles are the same as with any language.
The approach you described is common, and PHP (One of the strengths) will allow you to comparatively easily go into the ORM code and modify it to your needs.
Second approach is to create a separate DB for each organization and a joint DB for shared resources.
A bit of a design challenge (but just a bit).
if you are really big, then you will even need to consider a separate DB server for each organization (I would say this is a serious overkill in 99.99999% of the cases).
This MSDN article gives you a very good overview of Data Architecture in Multi-tenancy: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa479086.aspx

Resources