Re: Serialization and Form Models

[Bert]

I found Igors post on smart entity models very helpful on that matter:

http://wicketinaction.com/2008/09/building-a-smart-entitymodel/

basically, it attaches/detaches only if an Id is set (hence, it can be fetched
from the backend)

Bert

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org

Re: Serialization and Form Models

[Matt Welch]

RaBe wrote:
 
 I found Igors post on smart entity models very helpful on that matter:
 
 http://wicketinaction.com/2008/09/building-a-smart-entitymodel/
 
 basically, it attaches/detaches only if an Id is set (hence, it can be
 fetched
 from the backend)
 
I had read that blog entry several times before but the significance of that
last part hadn't stuck with me. I adapted my entity model (using Neo4J not
Hibernate) and it looks like a good solution. Thanks for the pointer!

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Serialization-and-Form-Models-tp27738959p27751745.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org

Re: Serialization and Form Models

[Riyad Kalla]

Matthew,

A quick absolute way to make sure those values are serialized is to use the
Java 'transient' keyword. But Wicket will be assuming that when a user hits
the Back button, that it can re-constitute the page from the serialized info
it has on disk, if it cannot, then yes you'll need a LoadableDetachable
model that can rebuild that expensive graph when demanded but you won't need
to persist it.

-R

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Matthew Welch matt...@welchkin.net wrote:

 Models have been my achilles heel when it comes to Wicket. Not so much
 their
 explicit use, but understanding whe they data they wrap around is
 serialized
 or kept in session and when it's not. I was running some tests today to
 experiment with just this subject. The domain object I was using in my
 tests
 intentionally had one field that I could, as an option, populate with
 unserializable value. This made it easy for me to determine when Wicket was
 trying to store the object with the page, as it would throw an exception. I
 created a page with a form to create new instances of this particular
 object. I initialized the form with a CompoundPropertyModel wrapped around
 my domain object. When I submitted the form and saved the object to my
 backend store , I received a WicketNotSerializableException. I was
 initially
 surprised by this, but after a few moments I realized (and correct me if
 I'm
 wrong) that the model wasn't detachable and that when I saved it the
 attribute I mentioned above was being populated with that unserializable
 value, but wicket was trying to save the page (probably to disk) with the
 model wrapped around the now unserializable object.

 I guess this isn't a big deal, but what concerns me, and the reason I was
 running these tests, was that some of the objects I'm working with have
 huge
 data graphs attached to them. I don't want these huge objects stored in
 memory or serialized with any of the pages to disk. Can a form be backed by
 a detachable model? It certainly wouldn't be a loadable detachable model
 for new objects that are to be created as there's nothing yet to load. If
 one can back a form with detachable model, does that limit anything that
 you
 can do with the form?