Injecting infra layer interface in app service - domain-driven-design

I have two aggregates, Advertiser and Payment.
I am using Paypal and Authorize.net payment gateway. So i created interface in infra layer.
interface IPaymentMethod
{
void ProcessPayment(PaymentInfo paymentInfo);
}
and implemented it again in infra layer.
Public class PaypalPaymentGateway : IPaymentMethod
{
public void ProcessPayment(PaymentInfo paymentInfo)
{
// call Paypal api and pass paymentinfo
}
}
//same for authorize.net payment gateway
Below is my app service class
public class PaymentGatewayService : IPaymentGatewayService
{
IPaypalMethod paypalMethod;
public PaymentGatewayService(IPaypalMethod paypalMethod)
{
this.paypalMethod = paypalMethod;
if (paypalMethod == null)
throw new Exception("PaypalMethod not initialized");
}
public void DepositFundInAdvertiser
(PaymentInfo paymentInfo, RegistrationID advertiserRegistrationID)
{
if (paymentMethod != null)
throw new Exception("PaymentMethod empty.");
PaymentResult paymentResult=
paymentMethod.ProcessPayment(paymentInfo);
Advertiser advertiser = advertiserRepository
.Find(advertiserRegistrationID);
advertiser.AddAdvertiserFund(paymentInfo.PaymentTotal);
advertiserRepository.Save(advertiser);
}
}
In App layer - can I inject PaypalMethod interface in App layer constructor and do the following in DepositFundInAdvertiser method?
Remember IPaypalMethod is created and implemented in infra layer.

Your approach seems good enough.
Only I would define IPayer abstraction inside domain layer instead of infrastructure layer.
Because it's (most likely) responsibility of domain model to decide how to react if payment is [un]successful.
//in domain model
public class IPayer{
bool Pay(Money amountToBePaid, BankAccount account);;
}
public class Payment{
public void Pay(IPayer payer){
EnsurePaymentCanBePaid();
IsPaid=payer.Pay(AmountToBePaid,Account);
if(!IsPaid) throw new Exception("Payment failed!");
}
}
//in infrastructure layer
public class PayPalPayer:IPayer{
public bool Pay(Money amountToBePaid, BankAccount account){
//bla bla
}
}

To follow up on my comment. I would also put the PaymentService in infrastructure layer as an infrastructure service. But as Arnis said you should also reflect ho the model respond to this action - Pay.
I (not sure) would probably have some kind of PaymentService in applicaion service layer that works with both entities Advertiser and Payment (through IAdvertiserRepository and IPaymentRepository injected through constructor).
In method (writing this method in memcode):
PaymentService.PayAdvert(Advertiser advertiser, Advert advert, Payment paymentInfo)
{
advertiser.BuyAdvertising(AdvertPayment.Create(advert,paymentInfo))
}
BuyAdvertising method takes both Advert and Payment into AdvertPayment class (which has a static create method for ctor itself. This class can be handy if you want a PaymentHistory collection for Advertiser that contains AdvertPayments in date order. But
BuyAdvertising raises a domain event BuyAdvertisingEvent that triggers a eventhandler in application layer, BuyAdvertisingEventHandler.
This Eventhandler has your IPaypalGatewayService injected in constructor. With the event we have Payment info. If Payment is a success the EventHandler can also have IAdvertiserRepository injected in ctor and save the AdvertPayment into Advertiser payment history collection.
then BuyAdvertising can determine the outcome of payment transaction by checking if advert is paid and added to history collection.
I hope you get the picture. This way you have several tools like an event which is declared in domain model and triggered from the entity advertiser. The model takes action and you have moved out the infra tech logic against PayPal through DomainEventHandler an still, you have not located the logic entirely in application layer. The control is in the domain, but details that domain don't care about is placed in infra layer.
My experience is that these scenarios are common for me and you usually go the easy way, letting the application service do all talking to infralayer. But then you're closingin on a anemic model design, because what is left for the model to do? Just validation properties? Just managing aggregates and collections? I think there is more to it. It should also contains a lot of entity action methods (I call them so... :)) like BuyAdvertisment.
/Cheers

Related

ServiceStack: business logic that depends on the database itself

I'm exploring ServiceStack and I'm not sure what is the best way to implement some business logic.
Using the "Bookings CRUD" example I would like to enforce the following rule:
a given Booking can only be saved (either created or updated) if the hotel has enough free rooms for the particular dates of that booking
Please note that I'm not asking how to calculate "free rooms".
What I'm asking is, from the architectural point of view, how should this be done.
For example, one way would be:
create a request DTO to query the number of configured rooms (lets call it "QueryRooms")
use the existing "QueryBookings" to query current bookings present in database
create a " : Service" class to customize the Booking Service, in order to intercept the "CreateBooking" and "UpdateBooking" requests
inside the custom methods for "CreateBooking" and "UpdateBooking", somehow get the results of "QueryRooms" and "QueryBookings", check if there are enough free rooms for the current request, and proceed only if so
This doesn't look very clean, because the service "CreateBooking" and "UpdateBooking" would depend of "QueryRooms" and "QueryBookings".
What would be an elegant and effcient solution, using ServiceStatck?
You can override AutoQuery CRUD operations with your own Service implementation using the AutoQuery DTO.
Where you can use the Service Gateway to call existing Services which you can use to perform any additional validation & modify the request DTO before executing the AutoQuery operation to implement the API, e.g:
public class MyCrudServices : Service
{
public IAutoQueryDb AutoQuery { get; set; }
public object Post(CreateBooking request)
{
var response = Gateway.Send(new QueryRooms
{
From = request.BookingStartDate,
To = request.BookingEndDate,
});
if (response.Results.Count == 0)
throw new Exception("No rooms available during those dates");
request.RoomNumber = response.Results[0].Id;
return AutoQuery.Create(request, base.Request);
}
}
Note: calling in-process Services with the Service Gateway is efficient as it calls the C# method implementation directly, i.e. without incurring any HTTP overhead.

Automatic binding to some service properties in Catel with Fody

Assuming there is some service:
public interface IDeviceManagerService
{
ISomeDeviceApi Api { get; }
}
It's purpose is to monitor external environment (USB, network, etc.), instantiate device API when the device detected and make property null when the device is no longer available.
Supposing there is a view model with this service injected, I would like to have change notifications for IDeviceManagerService.Api to make things like below possible (for example, having the button which is only active when the device API is available).
private Boolean OnSomeCommandCanExecute()
{
return _deviceManagerService.Api != null;
}
I wonder if there is a clean way to make this work without manual change notifications handling (with Catel.Fody or PropertyChanged.Fody). So far I have managed to get working result by making service implementation derived from ModelBase, registering it's injected instance as a [Model] inside the view model and exposing it's Api property using [ViewModelToModel] attribute, but this is very dirty way.
Is there some common approach or It would be better to go with implementing INotifyPropertyChanged and use notifications wrapper instead?
In most approaches, services don't implement INotifyPropertyChanged (they are not models), so my recommendation is to add manual events:
public interface IDeviceManagerService
{
ISomeDeviceApi Api { get; }
event EventHandler<DeviceApiEventArgs> ApiChanged;
}
This way you can deal with the stuff you are interested in (subscribe in InitializeAsync, unsubscribe in CloseAsync).

Using MVC5 Repository pattern but need advice on where to put business logic

My latest MVC solution consists of an MVC5 site and a DAL class library that will contain a repository interface and class for each entity. I am trying to figure out where to place business logic for my entities such as CheckingAccount.Withdrawl or CheckingAccount.Deposit. Any suggestions? Should this be done within the Model folder within the MVC project while all of the repository classes are in my DAL?
Ideally you want to separate your actual business logic from your entities and abstract it away from your database or ORM as much as possible by creating a business logic layer and injecting your repository into your service/business logic layer using an IoC container and dependency injection.
The common approach is to create a separate class library for your business logic layer that remains agnostic of your UI layer (meaning your UI layer could be an MVC front end or even restful web service) and communicates via data transfer objects.
Here is a simple example:
MVC Controller / UI
public class AccountCheckingController : Controller
{
private readonly IAccountService AccountService;
public CheckingAccountController(IAccountService accountService)
{
this.AccountService accountService;
}
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Deposit(decimal depositAmount)
{
...
DepositReceiptDto depositReceipt = this.accountServive.Deposit(accountId, depositAmount);
...
return new DepositViewModel {
Receipt = depositReceipt
}
}
}
Business Logic Class / Service (stored in a class library such as WebsiteName.Services or Website.BusinessLogic
public class AccountService : IAccountService
{
private readonly IAccountRepository Repository;
public AccountService(IAccountRepository repository)
{
this.Repository = repository;
}
public DepositReceiptDto Deposit(int accountId, decimal depositAmount)
{
// Perform actions against your repository/ORM here.
return new DepositReceiptDto {
DepositAmount = depositAmount,
User = UserDto,
Status = Status.Success
};
}
...
}
As you can see, by using this separation you can easily switch out your UI without having to perform much work.
I hope this helps.
If something is not an entity and is not a value object, then it's a service. Correct namespace for service depends on his level. Data-access services may be located in the Project.Dal or Project.Dal.Services. The good namespace for domain's service is the Project.Domain.Services.

Domain driven design external systems and technical dependencies

I am designing a system using domain driven design concepts and I am struggling with a few things. The "domain" is essentially a business system for the company I work for. I am also using dependency injection. So, in my model I have things related to any typical business system (Employee, Order, Invoice, Deposit, etc..). Right now I am trying to create a cash posting application in which users (aka Employees) can create deposits and apply them to unpaid invoices. The problem that I am having is that we are also using an external business system (Microsoft Dynamics Nav) to handle our accounting transactions. So essentially I am dealing with two different databases. So, for the cash posting application I have modeled the domain objects Deposit and DepositLine. I also have in my domain an IDepositRepository interface that is responsible for persisting the deposits. To get a deposit from the system I just want to grab it directly from the database. However, in order to create a deposit I have to use the Dynamics Nav web services because there is certain logic that gets executed behind the scenes that I don't know about. I started looking at the concept of an Anti Corruption layer in which I could translate my version of the deposit object into a deposit object suitable for the web service. So here is what I am envisioning right now:
Domain Layer
- Models
- Deposit
- DepositLine
- Repositories
- IDepositRepository
Infrastructure Layer
- Data
- Repositories
- DepositRepository
- DynamicsNav
- Services
- INavCashManagementService
- Translators
- IDepositTranslator
- Adapters
- INavAdapter
Now I thought i might implement the DepositRepository like so:
public class DepositRepository
{
private INavCashManagementService navCashManagementService;
public DepositRepository(INavCashManagementService navCashManagementService)
{
this.navCashManagementService = navCashManagementService;
}
public Deposit GetDeposit(int id)
{
// use nhibernate to get directly from the database
}
public void SaveDeposit(Deposit deposit)
{
this.navCashManagementService.CreateDeposit(deposit);
}
}
First of all, is this an appropriate design? My next problem is that users are also going to have to "Post" deposits. The Nav web services will also have to be used to run the posting routine. But, this is more of a business process rather than a persistence issue, so I don't see it fitting into the repository. So I am wondering how/where I should call the posting routine. Should I create a domain service like this:
public class CashPostingDomainService
{
private INavCashManagementService navCashManagementService;
public CashPostingDomainService(INavCashManagementService navCashManagementService)
{
this.navCashManagementService = navCashManagementService;
}
public void PostDeposits()
{
this.navCashManagementService.PostDeposits();
}
}
One confusion I have with domain driven design is external dependencies. Doesn't the CashPostingDomainService class now have an external dependency on Nav? I know the implementation isn't in the domain layer, but doesn't the interface itself make it a dependency? The same goes with other technical concerns like sending emails. If I have an IEmailService interface and want to send an email once the deposits are posted, would I inject the interface into the CashPostingDomainService class? Or would that be part of the application workflow? So which one of these options make the most sense (if any):
1
public class DepositController
{
private ICashPostingDomainService cashPostingDomainService;
private IEmailService emailService;
public DepositController(
ICashPostingDomainService cashPostingDomainService,
IEmailService emailService)
{
this.cashPostingDomainService = cashPostingDomainService;
this.emailService = emailService;
}
public void PostDeposits()
{
this.cashPostingDomainService.PostDeposits();
this.emailService.NotifyDepositsPosted();
}
}
2
public class DepositController
{
private ICashPostingDomainService cashPostingDomainService;
public DepositController(
ICashPostingDomainService cashPostingDomainService)
{
this.cashPostingDomainService = cashPostingDomainService;
}
public void PostDeposits()
{
this.cashPostingDomainService.PostDeposits();
}
}
public class CashPostingDomainService
{
private INavCashManagementService navCashManagementService;
private IEmailService emailService;
public CashPostingDomainService(
INavCashManagementService navCashManagementService,
IEmailService emailService)
{
this.navCashManagementService = navCashManagementService;
this.emailService = emailService;
}
public void PostDeposits()
{
this.navCashManagementService.PostDeposits();
this.emailService.NotifyDepositsPosted();
}
}
Thanks for the help!
is this an appropriate design?
It seems fine to me. The important thing is for your Repository to stay oblivious of the Nav side of things and let the anticorruption layer handle that. You might want to have a look here for a similar example.
I know the implementation isn't in the domain layer, but doesn't the
interface itself make it a dependency?
You may have that feeling because the name of your (supposedly agnostic) service interface contains "Nav". To reflect a service abstraction that could have Nav or any other ERP as an implementation, you should rename it to ICashManagementService.
If I have an IEmailService interface and want to send an email once
the deposits are posted, would I inject the interface into the
CashPostingDomainService class? Or would that be part of the
application workflow?
It's your architectural decision to choose one or the other.
Option 1. means that sending an email is an intrinsic part of the deposit posting domain operation. If you take your domain module and reuse it in another application, posting deposits will automatically result in sending an email whatever that application is about. This might be the right thing to do in your context, or you might want to make things a little more generic (like, sending feedback after the operation but not deciding in the domain service whether this feedback should be mail, a log file, etc.)
Option 2. means that the sequence of events that happen after posting the deposits is application specific, that is at the use case level rather than business/domain level. It is up to the Controller (or Application Service) to decide which actions to take -send an email or anything else. Consequently, different applications based around your domain layer could decide to take different actions. This also means possible code duplication between these applications if several of them chose to send mails.

Interface with service layer or domain objects themselves? (DDD)

I'm still learning about DDD and I have these two (probably simple) questions:
If a Factory creates new object/graph/aggregate instances, but also "reconstitutes" objects/graphs from the Repository, then:
(1) Does your service layer functions/jobs/tasks/unit-of-work call into the Factory or a behavioural method on the Entity instance or a DomainService function? I'm lost as to the call stack based on the responsibility of these components.
(2) Do Entity instances even have "behavioural methods" like above? For example does a Post have p.UpdatePost(string bodyText) or is that not a concern of the domain model and so the same should be achieved with the Repository? Or the service layer function, should it be calling the Repository in this case and the entity instance simply have behavioural methods that are specific to the domain and not persistence? But then, why does it sound like "updating a post" is a domain function when that's the user's goal?
You can see I'm all over the place. Please help.
(1) Does your service layer functions/jobs/tasks/unit-of-work call into the Factory or a behavioral method on the Entity instance or a DomainService function? I'm lost as to the call stack based on the responsibility of these components.
Usually - top level retrieves necessary aggregate root and calls a function on it. Sometimes top level retrieves multiple aggregate roots and pass them to domain service, but not often because domain service is a quite strong sign that there is unrecognized aggregate root. At the end - top level ensures aggregate root is persisted.
(2) Do Entity instances even have "behavioural methods" like above? For example does a Post have p.UpdatePost(string bodyText) or is that not a concern of the domain model and so the same should be achieved with the Repository? Or the service layer function, should it be calling the Repository in this case and the entity instance simply have behavioural methods that are specific to the domain and not persistence? But then, why does it sound like "updating a post" is a domain function when that's the user's goal?
Yes, they do. Domain model should be aware of it's state changes. And that's much more beneficial as it seems at first. Great thing about this is that You gain extensibility point. If client will walk week later to You and say that he wants system to check additional things when user updates post - instead of searching every line of post.bodyText="new value", You will be able to go straight to post.UpdatePost method and attach necessary things there.
On the other hand - CRUD is not mutually exclusive with domain driven design. E.g. - in my application, management of users and their roles is uninteresting enough that I'm not even trying to model it granularly. You need to recognize parts what matters in business Your application is describing and working with.
Keep in mind that domain driven design makes sense for complex applications only. Simple blog application doesn't need it.
(3) Am I wrong in assuming that a service layer (not Domain Services) should encapsulate how an interface interacts with the Domain Layer?
As I see it - application services are more for orchestrating infrastructure. If there is no infrastructure involved - then application service loses value:
Application services basically are just facades. And every facade is bad if complexity it adds overweights problems it solves.
Inside domain:
//aggregate root is persistence ignorant.
//it shouldn't reference repository directly
public class Customer{
public string Name {get; private set;}
public static Customer Register(string name){
return new Customer(name);
}
protected Customer(string name){
//here it's aware of state changes.
//aggregate root changes it's own state
//instead of having state changed from outside
//through public properties
this.Name=name;
}
}
//domain model contains abstraction of persistence
public interface ICustomerRepository{
void Save(Customer customer);
}
Outside of domain:
public class CustomerRepository:ICustomerRepository{
//here we actually save state of customer into database/cloud/xml/whatever
public void Save(Customer customer){
//note that we do not change state of customer, we just persist it here
_voodoo.StoreItSomehow(customer);
}
}
//asp.net mvc controller
public class CustomerController{
public CustomerController(ICustomerRepository repository){
if (repository==null)throw new ArgumentNullException();
_repository=repository;
}
public ActionResult Register(string name){
var customer=Customer.Register(name);
_repository.Save(customer);
}
}

Resources