Ya know, if we are going to roll this, why not build a paging model into it from the git go? I bet tons of folks have done that already or have their own hacks around it (I perform my sql query for ID's only, for the specific page of results i want, then loop and return the transfer objects as a part of a structure with totalPages, currentPage, itemsPerPage, and the TO array.
just thinkin out loud here Chris On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Adam Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm getting the feeling that either you guys don't have your own > implementation of this pattern in transfer, or your just holding out > on me.. ;) > > @Peter.. > How have you used transfer with your IBO pattern? Does LightBase use > Transfer? > > @Chris > I would like to suggest that we define the scope of the TIOB > responsibilities, and dependencies, and then specify the functionality > and implementations which are required for our general use cases... > > @John > I would be able to commit a super alpha tag once we lay this thing > out... and I would look froward to as much testing and feedback as > possible...besides I need some extra validation in my life =). > > > > For Follow Up: > > Does anyone have any caveats or advice they can share when approaching > this? > Mark, Is this an abomination of the TransferObject?? > What are some of the other "design around" practices in use? > Any one else interested in collaborating/helping/testing? > > > I remain, > Adam Drew > > > > > On Dec 5, 7:48 pm, "John Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I design around this, but would love to check it out when/if super alpha. > > > > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:49 AM, Chris Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I want to see this too =) With the latest proxy object support and > lazy > > > loading, I have been using an array of transfer objects in a few > places, > > > which I would love to gut and replace with something like your TIBO > > > (Transfer Iterating Business Object, lets spread the word, thats the > new > > > acronym). If you need a tester let me know =) > > > > > Chris Peterson > > > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:20 AM, Peter Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >> Im certainly interested in seeing how this progresses :-) > > > > >> Peter > > > > >> On Dec 5, 2008, at 1:05 AM, Adam wrote: > > > > >> > I am trying to create an IteratingTransferObject, or > > >> > AbastractIteratingObject, or IteratingBusinessObject (IBO) as > > >> > described by Mr. Peter Bell... > > > > >> > I need something to kill the OIP evil do-er with transfer objects > from > > >> > large tables that _need_ the concrete, mixin, and abstract code to > > >> > perform accordingly... (validation/documentation/business objects, > ui, > > >> > ajax calls, mvc plugins, services, gateways..) I was never never > able > > >> > to find, or didn't look in the right places for a solid example of > the > > >> > pattern in use with transfer. > > > > >> > I think it's a great idea, so I did a quick and dirty test in my > > >> > model .. this dirty test gave my ui an unscientifically estimation > of > > >> > 80%!! reduction in load times on large record sets, as compared to > > >> > when i just use very large transfer object collections. > > > > >> > In my proof of concept I immediately ran into a few things right of > > >> > the bat that would require some rethinking and refactoring.. > But.... > > >> > I don't want to run off into the desert with no water if there is > > >> > another route... > > > > >> > My ITO is a factory generated, beanInjected, wrapper on a new > transfer > > >> > object that is being populated() by my Abstract Decorator and looped > > >> > over a cached query,. so when i get one of these 'transferObjects' > > >> > it's not exactly being created by Transfer, and I found that i was > > >> > getting a PK = 0 and isPersisted = false and isDirty=true..... > > > > >> > I quickly hacked my wrapper to get the PK from the > instance.recordset, > > >> > insted of the TO just to make it work.... but I cant move any > further > > >> > with this until i get my head around the Performance / Development/ > > >> > Cost involved... or at least make me feel comfortable that it's > going > > >> > to work until adobe _hopefully_ fixes the OIP in CF9???.. > > > > >> > I'm just looking for any feedback from anyone with any interest in > my > > >> > topic.. > > > > >> > Thanks Guys! > > > > > -- > > > Hey! I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to > do > > > what you tell me to do! ~ Bender (Futurama) > > > -- Hey! I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do what you tell me to do! ~ Bender (Futurama) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Before posting questions to the group please read: http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev/web/how-to-ask-support-questions-on-transfer You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transfer-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
