RE: A question about CFCFactory objects as a singleton ....
Hi Mike I would take the approach of passing the user object in as part of your DAO save (or create and update) method. Just as you only need a singleton factory, you also only need singleton DAOs. Best regards Kevan Stannard -Original Message- From: Mike Kear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 9 January 2007 5:24 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: A question about CFCFactory objects as a singleton yes as a matter of routine, my tables usually have fields for: createdby (the userid of the person who created this record) datecreated (timestamp) updatedby (The userid of the last person to alter this record) dateupdated (timestamp) So the methods in the DAOs that manipulate the records need to be told who's doing it. Since DAOs dont know anything about the application, request or session scopes, they have to be told what they need to know. In this case they dont need to know the curent time (thats from the getdate() function in the database) but they do need to know the userid of the person initiating this action.My question was about the best way to pass this info in, since the application doesnt .instantiate the dao directly, but through a CFCFactory which knows everything it needs to know to instantiate any CFC required. When someone logs in, there is a userbean created in their session scope, containing their name, userid, access rights and lots more depending on what else happens in this site. So the question is about this .if there is only one CFCFactory created as a singleton in the Application scope, all the users on the site are using the same instance of the CFC to instantiate whatever CFCS they need. Each time, the CFC being created will need to be told who's the user, so it can update any records it needs to update correctly. Or perhaps it's better to pass the userID into each method as it's called rather than into the init method of the DAO cfc. The options in my first post were the ones that came to mind as i wrote it, but there are probably other possibilities What's brought this to mind now is that i'm working on an app that will have maybe 150-200 concurrent users, all accessing, creating and updating records. In the past i've had plenty of reasonably high traffic sites, but none with that many users creating and updating records simultaniously. The high traffic has all been in the read only category,with the write/update being one or two people at a time max. Under those low traffic situations it doesnt really matter to have everyone with their own CFCFactory. One or two fo them in RAM isnt a big deal 100-200 of them would definitely have a performance hit on the site so i can't do that here. Thats' the background to my question. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Adobe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month On 1/9/07, Josh Nathanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It seems like option [B] would use a lot less memory resources. > > A little more detail about how your objects are set up would be helpful to > get a clearer picture. Do you have multiple tables which each store which > user/ when created? It seems like you could have a userID property in > each > of your objects that needs to maintain the user info, then do: > > myObject.setUserID(session.userbean.getUserID()) > > before commiting. Then have timestamp field in the db. > > > ~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2 http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:266030 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: A question about CFCFactory objects as a singleton ....
Are you putting the entire factory into session or the results of the factory? It seems like to me that you put your factory into a less transient scope like your application scope and then your user's session invokes an instances of the factory as related to the user. As for credentials, how much do you really need about the user? You could instantiate a bean of the user into the session scope, but that is just the bean for the user and not a gateway or DAO. The rest of your application can use the bean of the user in whichever gateway or DAO that you need. Teddy On 1/8/07, Mike Kear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > yes as a matter of routine, my tables usually have fields for: > > createdby (the userid of the person who created this record) > datecreated (timestamp) > updatedby (The userid of the last person to alter this record) > dateupdated (timestamp) > > So the methods in the DAOs that manipulate the records need to be told > who's > doing it. Since DAOs dont know anything about the application, request or > session scopes, they have to be told what they need to know. In this > case > they dont need to know the curent time (thats from the getdate() function > in > the database) but they do need to know the userid of the person initiating > this action.My question was about the best way to pass this info in, > since the application doesnt .instantiate the dao directly, but through a > CFCFactory which knows everything it needs to know to instantiate any CFC > required. > > When someone logs in, there is a userbean created in their session scope, > containing their name, userid, access rights and lots more depending on > what > else happens in this site. > > So the question is about this .if there is only one CFCFactory created > as a singleton in the Application scope, all the users on the site are > using > the same instance of the CFC to instantiate whatever CFCS they need. Each > time, the CFC being created will need to be told who's the user, so it can > update any records it needs to update correctly. Or perhaps it's better > to > pass the userID into each method as it's called rather than into the init > method of the DAO cfc. > > The options in my first post were the ones that came to mind as i wrote > it, > but there are probably other possibilities > > What's brought this to mind now is that i'm working on an app that will > have > maybe 150-200 concurrent users, all accessing, creating and updating > records. In the past i've had plenty of reasonably high traffic sites, > but > none with that many users creating and updating records > simultaniously. The > high traffic has all been in the read only category,with the write/update > being one or two people at a time max. Under those low traffic situations > it > doesnt really matter to have everyone with their own CFCFactory. One or > two fo them in RAM isnt a big deal 100-200 of them would definitely have > a > performance hit on the site so i can't do that here. > > Thats' the background to my question. > > Cheers > Mike Kear > Windsor, NSW, Australia > Adobe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer > AFP Webworks > http://afpwebworks.com > ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month > > > On 1/9/07, Josh Nathanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It seems like option [B] would use a lot less memory resources. > > > > A little more detail about how your objects are set up would be helpful > to > > get a clearer picture. Do you have multiple tables which each store > which > > user/ when created? It seems like you could have a userID property in > > each > > of your objects that needs to maintain the user info, then do: > > > > myObject.setUserID(session.userbean.getUserID()) > > > > before commiting. Then have timestamp field in the db. > > > > > > > > > ~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2 http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:265981 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Re: A question about CFCFactory objects as a singleton ....
yes as a matter of routine, my tables usually have fields for: createdby (the userid of the person who created this record) datecreated (timestamp) updatedby (The userid of the last person to alter this record) dateupdated (timestamp) So the methods in the DAOs that manipulate the records need to be told who's doing it. Since DAOs dont know anything about the application, request or session scopes, they have to be told what they need to know. In this case they dont need to know the curent time (thats from the getdate() function in the database) but they do need to know the userid of the person initiating this action.My question was about the best way to pass this info in, since the application doesnt .instantiate the dao directly, but through a CFCFactory which knows everything it needs to know to instantiate any CFC required. When someone logs in, there is a userbean created in their session scope, containing their name, userid, access rights and lots more depending on what else happens in this site. So the question is about this .if there is only one CFCFactory created as a singleton in the Application scope, all the users on the site are using the same instance of the CFC to instantiate whatever CFCS they need. Each time, the CFC being created will need to be told who's the user, so it can update any records it needs to update correctly. Or perhaps it's better to pass the userID into each method as it's called rather than into the init method of the DAO cfc. The options in my first post were the ones that came to mind as i wrote it, but there are probably other possibilities What's brought this to mind now is that i'm working on an app that will have maybe 150-200 concurrent users, all accessing, creating and updating records. In the past i've had plenty of reasonably high traffic sites, but none with that many users creating and updating records simultaniously. The high traffic has all been in the read only category,with the write/update being one or two people at a time max. Under those low traffic situations it doesnt really matter to have everyone with their own CFCFactory. One or two fo them in RAM isnt a big deal 100-200 of them would definitely have a performance hit on the site so i can't do that here. Thats' the background to my question. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Adobe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month On 1/9/07, Josh Nathanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It seems like option [B] would use a lot less memory resources. > > A little more detail about how your objects are set up would be helpful to > get a clearer picture. Do you have multiple tables which each store which > user/ when created? It seems like you could have a userID property in > each > of your objects that needs to maintain the user info, then do: > > myObject.setUserID(session.userbean.getUserID()) > > before commiting. Then have timestamp field in the db. > > > ~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2 http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:265979 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Re: A question about CFCFactory objects as a singleton ....
It seems like option [B] would use a lot less memory resources. A little more detail about how your objects are set up would be helpful to get a clearer picture. Do you have multiple tables which each store which user/ when created? It seems like you could have a userID property in each of your objects that needs to maintain the user info, then do: myObject.setUserID(session.userbean.getUserID()) before commiting. Then have timestamp field in the db. - Original Message - From: "Mike Kear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:51 AM Subject: A question about CFCFactory objects as a singleton > I'm building an app where usage is going to be FAR higher than anything > i've > used OOP for before, so I am trying to be careful to build it with the > potential bottlenecks in mind. In this job i might have several hundred > concurrent users accessing the application.(in the past i've used it > for > things like a CMS where only one person is going to be using it for an > hour > or so every few days at most, so bottlenecks and performance issues are > still important but not as high a priority). ~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2 http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:265963 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Re: A question about CFCFactory objects as a singleton ....
I choose [B]. Less objects = a good thing. On 1/8/07, Mike Kear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm building an app where usage is going to be FAR higher than anything i've > used OOP for before, so I am trying to be careful to build it with the > potential bottlenecks in mind. In this job i might have several hundred > concurrent users accessing the application.(in the past i've used it for > things like a CMS where only one person is going to be using it for an hour > or so every few days at most, so bottlenecks and performance issues are > still important but not as high a priority). > > I have a CFCFactory, that generates all the DAOs and Beans as i need but > since every record has a trace of who created it and when, and who was the > last to access it and when, the CFCFactory needs to pass to the CFC the > credentials of the user. My question is about the best way to pass the > credentials in > > A couple of scenarios: > > [A] Should I give each logged in user their own instance of the CFCFactory > in the session scope, telling the CFCFactory their login credentials when > it's instantiated. Then the CFCFactory passes the credentials on to each > CFC as they're instantiated > > OR > > [B] Have only one instance of the CFCFactory in the application scope, > passing in the credentials to the createbean(session.userbean) or createDAO( > session.userbean) method as it's called > > OR > > [C] I've missed the point entirely and there's a whole n'other way to look > at it and get the user's credentials down to the final insert/update query. > > > > -- > Cheers > Mike Kear > Windsor, NSW, Australia > Adobe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer > AFP Webworks > http://afpwebworks.com > ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month > > > ~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2 http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:265960 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
