Sorry in advance if this question is unclear. Please tell me what to change to make it a better question.
I am currently maintaining a C# WinForm system where I'm trying to learn and use DDD and CQRS principles. Vaughn Vernon's Implementing Domain Driven Design is my main DDD reference literature.
The system currently uses legacy code which makes use of Data Aware Controls.
In the Asset Inventory Context, i have designed my aggregate root Asset which composes of multiple valueObjects which are standard entries in the system:
In this Context, i'm trying to implement a use case where the user can manually register an Asset to the system.
My current implementation is the following:
From Presentation Layer:
Upon loading the RegisterAssetForm.cs it loads the existing standard entry lists of Group, ItemName, etc. through the Data Aware controls, all consisting of data rows with columnsid: int and name: string.
When the user selects the desired ItemName, Group, PropertyLevel, Department, and Category, then clicks save, a command is performed:
RegisterAssetForm.cs
...
AssetInventoryApplicationService _assetInventoryServ;
...
void btnSave_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
int itemNameId = srcItemName.Value // srcItemName is a custom control whose Value = datarow["id"]
int groupId = srcGroup.Value;
string categoryId = srcCategory.Value;
string departmentId = srcDepartment.Value;
string propLvlId = srcPropLevel.Value;
...
RegisterAssetCommand cmd = new RegisterAssetCommand(itemNameId, groupId, categoryId, departmentId, propLvlId);
_assetInventoryServ.RegisterAsset(cmd);
...
}
From Application Layer:
The AssetInventoryApplicationService depends on domain services.
AssetInventoryApplicationService.cs
...
IAssetRepository _assetRepo;
...
public void RegisterAsset(RegisterAssetCommand cmd)
{
...
AssetFactory factory = new AssetFactory();
AssetID newId = _assetRepo.NextId();
Asset asset = factory.CreateAsset(newId, cmd.ItemNameId, cmd.PropertyLevelId,
cmd.GroupId, cmd.CategoryId, cmd.DepartmentId);
_assetRepo.Save(asset);
...
}
From Domain Layer:
AssetFactory.cs //not my final implementation
...
public class AssetFactory
{
...
public Asset CreateAsset(AssetID id, int itemNameId, int propLvlId, int groupId, int categoryId, int departmentId)
{
ItemName itemName = new ItemName(itemNameId);
PropertyLevel propLvl = new PropertyLevel(propLvlNameId);
Group group = new Group(groupNameId);
Category category = new Category(categoryNameId);
Department department = new Department(departmentNameId);
return new Asset(id, itemName, propLvl, group, category, deparment);
}
...
}
Sample table of what fills my value objects
+------------+--------------+
| CategoryID | CategoryName |
+------------+--------------+
| 1 | Category1 |
| 2 | Category2 |
| 3 | Category3 |
| 4 | Category4 |
| 5 | Category5 |
+------------+--------------+
I know domain models must be persistence-ignorant that's why i intend to use surrogate identites (id field) in Layer Supertype with my valueobject to separate the persistence concern from the domain.
The main property to distinguish my value objects is their Name
From the presentation layer, i send the standard entry value as integer id corresponding to primary keys through a command to the application layer which uses domain services.
Problem
* Is it right for me to pass the standard entry's id when creating the command, or should I pass the string name?
* If id is passed, how do i construct the standard entry value object if name is needed?
* If name is passed, do i need to figure out the id from a repository?
* Or am I simply designing my standard entry value objects incorrectly?
Thanks for your help.
It looks to me that you may be confusing a Value Object and an Entity.
The essential difference is that an Entity needs an Id but a VO is a thing (rather than a specific thing). A telephone number in a CRM would likely be a VO. But it would likely be an Entity in if you are a telephone company.
I have an example of VO in this post which you may find helpful - you can get it here
To answer your 'Problems' more specifically:
If you are creating some entity then it can be advantageous to pass in the id to a command. That way you already know what the id will be.
You shouldn't be able to create an invalid value object.
Why can't you pass in the name and the ID? Again - not sure this is relevant to a Value Object
I think you have designed them incorrectly. But I can't be sure because I don't know your specific domain.
Hope this helps!
I'm trying to create a repository of data that I can use for testing purposes for an emerging car production and design company.
Beginning Automapper Question:
In this project, I have 2 classes that share the same properties for the most part. I don't need the Id, so I am ignoring that.
My existing code looks like this:
Mapper.CreateMap<RaceCar, ProductionCar>()
.Ignore(d => d.fId) //ignore the ID
.ForMember(d=> d.ShowRoomName,
o=> o.MapFrom(s => s.FactoryName) //different property names but same thing really
//combine into my new test car
var testCarObject = Mapper.Map<RaceCar, ProductionCar>()
My main requirements are:
1) I need to create 100 of these test car objects
2) and that for every ProductionCar I use, it needs to have a corresponding RaceCar which are matched up by the name(ShowRoomName & FactoryName)
So is there a way of sticking this in some type of loop or array so that I can create the needed 100?
Also, is there a way to ensure that each new test car has the combined FactoryCar and RaceCar?
Thanks!
Use AutoMapper with AutoFixture:
var fixture = new Fixture();
var items = Enumerable.Range(1, 100)
.Select(i => fixture.Create<RaceCar>())
.Select(car => new { RaceCar = car, ProductionCar = Mapper.Map<RaceCar, ProductionCar>(car))
.ToList();
items.Profit()
I used tomahawk tree2 component to display directory structure in a JSP page. I have maintained parent and child folder relationship in a database table. Example DB table looks as below.
When i pass 7 as PARENT_FOLDER_ID to the table i get 87 and 587 as it's sub-folders. Again 87 and 587 contains 6067 and 12704 as their sub-folders. This example only has 2 level relationship.
I need to traverse this relationship until last sub-folder(Which doesn't contains folders.From the example 2117, 2177, 2312, 2379, 6067, 12704 are last folders.). How to achieve this traversing process in java. Please help me to find the solution.
Thank you.
Recursive approach:
public void processChilds(int parentID) {
List childs=selectChilds(parentID);//call method which return list of sub folders of the parameter
for(int i=0;i<childs.size();i++) {
processChilds(childs.get(i));//call processChilds() for each child
}
}
And Implement the selectChilds(int parentID) as your requirement and that must return list of sub folders.
I have list like this:
var list = new List<string>();
This list contains lets say following names: "Ken", "John", "Tom", etc.
I need to add this list to database table which looks like this:
Id SecondId Name
1 1 Ken
2 1 John
3 2 Tom
Where SecondId is secondary key and that info i already have. But my question is there a better way of adding all names to the database without iterating through list using foreach loop? Any linq query or some other way or i have to iterate through the list to add them to database one by one?
I don't think there is a way to add the list as a chunk.
You could use the ForEach extension method on the List like so (assuming you are using a DbContext for database access):
using (var context = new NameContext()) {
list.ForEach(i => context.Names.Add(new Name(i, SECOND_ID)));
}
You can use the same approach but use you database writing code inside the lambda expression in case you are not using DbContext.
[UPDATE] Chosen approach is below, as a response to this question
Hi,
I' ve been looking around in this subject but I can't really find what I'm looking for...
With Code tables I mean: stuff like 'maritial status', gender, specific legal or social states... More specifically, these types have only set properties and the items are not about to change soon (but could). Properties being an Id, a name and a description.
I'm wondering how to handle these best in the following technologies:
in the database (multiple tables, one table with different code-keys...?)
creating the classes (probably something like inheriting ICode with ICode.Name and ICode.Description)
creating the view/presenter for this: there should be a screen containing all of them, so a list of the types (gender, maritial status ...), and then a list of values for that type with a name & description for each item in the value-list.
These are things that appear in every single project, so there must be some best practice on how to handle these...
For the record, I'm not really fond of using enums for these situations... Any arguments on using them here are welcome too.
[FOLLOW UP]
Ok, I've gotten a nice answer by CodeToGlory and Ahsteele. Let's refine this question.
Say we're not talking about gender or maritial status, wich values will definately not change, but about "stuff" that have a Name and a Description, but nothing more. For example: Social statuses, Legal statuses.
UI:
I want only one screen for this. Listbox with possibe NameAndDescription Types (I'll just call them that), listbox with possible values for the selected NameAndDescription Type, and then a Name and Description field for the selected NameAndDescription Type Item.
How could this be handled in View & Presenters? I find the difficulty here that the NameAndDescription Types would then need to be extracted from the Class Name?
DB:
What are pro/cons for multiple vs single lookup tables?
Using database driven code tables can very useful. You can do things like define the life of the data (using begin and end dates), add data to the table in real time so you don't have to deploy code, and you can allow users (with the right privileges of course) add data through admin screens.
I would recommend always using an autonumber primary key rather than the code or description. This allows for you to use multiple codes (of the same name but different descriptions) over different periods of time. Plus most DBAs (in my experience) rather use the autonumber over text based primary keys.
I would use a single table per coded list. You can put multiple codes all into one table that don't relate (using a matrix of sorts) but that gets messy and I have only found a couple situations where it was even useful.
Couple of things here:
Use Enumerations that are explicitly clear and will not change. For example, MaritalStatus, Gender etc.
Use lookup tables for items that are not fixed as above and may change, increase/decrease over time.
It is very typical to have lookup tables in the database. Define a key/value object in your business tier that can work with your view/presentation.
I have decided to go with this approach:
CodeKeyManager mgr = new CodeKeyManager();
CodeKey maritalStatuses = mgr.ReadByCodeName(Code.MaritalStatus);
Where:
CodeKeyManager can retrieve CodeKeys from DB (CodeKey=MaritalStatus)
Code is a class filled with constants, returning strings so Code.MaritalStatus = "maritalStatus". These constants map to to the CodeKey table > CodeKeyName
In the database, I have 2 tables:
CodeKey with Id, CodeKeyName
CodeValue with CodeKeyId, ValueName, ValueDescription
DB:
alt text http://lh3.ggpht.com/_cNmigBr3EkA/SeZnmHcgHZI/AAAAAAAAAFU/2OTzmtMNqFw/codetables_1.JPG
Class Code:
public class Code
{
public const string Gender = "gender";
public const string MaritalStatus = "maritalStatus";
}
Class CodeKey:
public class CodeKey
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string CodeName { get; set; }
public IList<CodeValue> CodeValues { get; set; }
}
Class CodeValue:
public class CodeValue
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public CodeKey Code { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
}
I find by far the easiest and most efficent way:
All code-data can be displayed in a identical manner (in the same view/presenter)
I don't need to create tables and classes for every code table that's to come
But I can still get them out of the database easily and use them easily with the CodeKey constants...
NHibernate can handle this easily too
The only thing I'm still considering is throwing out the GUID Id's and using string (nchar) codes for usability in the business logic.
Thanks for the answers! If there are any remarks on this approach, please do!
I lean towards using a table representation for this type of data. Ultimately if you have a need to capture the data you'll have a need to store it. For reporting purposes it is better to have a place you can draw that data from via a key. For normalization purposes I find single purpose lookup tables to be easier than a multi-purpose lookup tables.
That said enumerations work pretty well for things that will not change like gender etc.
Why does everyone want to complicate code tables? Yes there are lots of them, but they are simple, so keep them that way. Just treat them like ever other object. Thy are part of the domain, so model them as part of the domain, nothing special. If you don't when they inevitibly need more attributes or functionality, you will have to undo all your code that currently uses it and rework it.
One table per of course (for referential integrity and so that they are available for reporting).
For the classes, again one per of course because if I write a method to recieve a "Gender" object, I don't want to be able to accidentally pass it a "MarritalStatus"! Let the compile help you weed out runtime error, that's why its there. Each class can simply inherit or contain a CodeTable class or whatever but that's simply an implementation helper.
For the UI, if it does in fact use the inherited CodeTable, I suppose you could use that to help you out and just maintain it in one UI.
As a rule, don't mess up the database model, don't mess up the business model, but it you wnt to screw around a bit in the UI model, that's not so bad.
I'd like to consider simplifying this approach even more. Instead of 3 tables defining codes (Code, CodeKey and CodeValue) how about just one table which contains both the code types and the code values? After all the code types are just another list of codes.
Perhaps a table definition like this:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Code](
[CodeType] [int] NOT NULL,
[Code] [int] NOT NULL,
[CodeDescription] [nvarchar](40) NOT NULL,
[CodeAbreviation] [nvarchar](10) NULL,
[DateEffective] [datetime] NULL,
[DateExpired] [datetime] NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_Code] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
[CodeType] ASC,
[Code] ASC
)
GO
There could be a root record with CodeType=0, Code=0 which represents the type for CodeType. All of the CodeType records will have a CodeType=0 and a Code>=1. Here is some sample data that might help clarify things:
SELECT CodeType, Code, Description FROM Code
Results:
CodeType Code Description
-------- ---- -----------
0 0 Type
0 1 Gender
0 2 Hair Color
1 1 Male
1 2 Female
2 1 Blonde
2 2 Brunette
2 3 Redhead
A check constraint could be added to the Code table to ensure that a valid CodeType is entered into the table:
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Code] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [CK_Code_CodeType]
CHECK (([dbo].[IsValidCodeType]([CodeType])=(1)))
GO
The function IsValidCodeType could be defined like this:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[IsValidCodeType]
(
#Code INT
)
RETURNS BIT
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #Result BIT
IF EXISTS(SELECT * FROM dbo.Code WHERE CodeType = 0 AND Code = #Code)
SET #Result = 1
ELSE
SET #Result = 0
RETURN #Result
END
GO
One issue that has been raised is how to ensure that a table with a code column has a proper value for that code type. This too could be enforced by a check constraint using a function.
Here is a Person table which has a gender column. It could be a best practice to name all code columns with the description of the code type (Gender in this example) followed by the word Code:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Person](
[PersonID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
[LastName] [nvarchar](40) NULL,
[FirstName] [nvarchar](40) NULL,
[GenderCode] [int] NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_Person] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([PersonID] ASC)
GO
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Person] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [CK_Person_GenderCode]
CHECK (([dbo].[IsValidCode]('Gender',[Gendercode])=(1)))
GO
IsValidCode could be defined this way:
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[IsValidCode]
(
#CodeTypeDescription NVARCHAR(40),
#Code INT
)
RETURNS BIT
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #CodeType INT
DECLARE #Result BIT
SELECT #CodeType = Code
FROM dbo.Code
WHERE CodeType = 0 AND CodeDescription = #CodeTypeDescription
IF (#CodeType IS NULL)
BEGIN
SET #Result = 0
END
ELSE
BEGiN
IF EXISTS(SELECT * FROM dbo.Code WHERE CodeType = #CodeType AND Code = #Code)
SET #Result = 1
ELSE
SET #Result = 0
END
RETURN #Result
END
GO
Another function could be created to provide the code description when querying a table that has a code column. Here is an
example of querying the Person table:
SELECT PersonID,
LastName,
FirstName,
GetCodeDescription('Gender',GenderCode) AS Gender
FROM Person
This was all conceived from the perspective of preventing the proliferation of lookup tables in the database and providing one lookup table. I have no idea whether this design would perform well in practice.