I am new to salt and currently I am working on a custom execution module that returns the list of customers on a specific production environment. I was thinking of adding it to the grains using the API.
My question is that a good practice, if not is there a better way of adding it to the grains?
Related
I know this is somewhat subjective, but Symfony being as it is there must be a feature specifically designed for this purpose.
Here are the main factors of what I need to do:
The system will be deployed separately for multiple customers (probably just a handful. scale isn't a big concern).
Each deployment has a small amount of highly bespoke functionality specific to the customer. This could be anything.
I want to maintain a single, common codebase (including composer.json). The only file I really want outside of our repo is parameters.yml.
My current thinking involves a custom bundle for every customer - hooking into them using custom Symfony events, fired from the common parts of the system. But ...
Symfony bundles aren't designed to be dynamically registered. They're baked into our core system so I can't switch them on and off for individual customers without forking/splitting the codebase. This means not only a bloated Kernel, but also events would be received by all bundles in all deployments.
I can get around that last point by namespacing the events with a configuration parameter. Even if I can live with redundant bundles in the Kernel, this whole approach seems too hard to be correct.
What is the proper way to support a "pluggable" architecture than I can hook into from the core system without splitting my codebase?
I use multiple app-directories. Then you can turn on/off bundles for each client since each client has it's own AppKernel.php and then you can create a separate /web/app.php for each client and point it to the currect app-directory.
You can then use mod-rewrite in Apache to point each client's subdomain or something to the right app.php file
I'm looking to develop a website that collects information that a user provides about their company, analyzes it based on industry trends I've saved into the system, and does something based on the information received (i.e. make recommendations, creates reports, sends out emails, and/or asks the user additional questions) using my industry knowledge. In addition to needing a rule engine to to provide information back to a user, I also will need to initiate workflow tasks that are assigned to my employees, vendors, or back to the user based on the rule engine logic.
I understand the business logic behind my idea, and how to use content management systems such as drupal. However, I'm not sure how to integrate my business logic, rules based on external market trends, and workflow technology into a content management system I can update as things change. I am looking for a solution that has a user interface to allow me to update the questions required (such as editing content types in Drupal), update my consultative knowledge database, and update the rules on how to apply them without having to hire a programmer when the business landscape changes.
In my research, I understand drupal rules module is not a true rete rules engine - so I don't believe I can use.
The concept of combining Drupal's content types (for collecting user information and editing fields), Jboss Drools' rule engine (for creating rules), and salesforce.com's workflow editor (for creating and assigning workflow tasks) is what I'm looking for. Is there anything out there that brings all of this together, in one web based user/admin solution that can be set up and used similar to Drupal's UI experience? In addition, am I even on the right track as far as the best way accomplish?
The Rules module is the de-facto standard Drupal rule engine. Could you elaborate about how it is not fit for your tasks.
A lot of contrib module supports it out of the box (ie. they provide new actions, event types, etc.). The Maestro module provides a generic workflow engine, with support for various tasks.
I have one application using a single database schema.
Nonetheless, the application has a core (having its DB objects) and can be extended with a plugin logic (each plugin having its DB objects).
Core DB objects and Plugins DB objects are distinct sets, since plugins are optional and may exist or may not.
Thus I need separate versionig and migration control for Core and each single plugin.
I'm wondering if there is some way, using Flyway, to manage this separate "migration paths".
The only thing I can think about is creating, under the same, single DB schema hosting the application, many different Flyway metadata tables (like schema_version_core, schema_version_plugin1, etc.) and managing migrations of each component independently.
Is this doable? Any smarter suggestion?
Many thanks
I highly recommend you split your DB into schemas, as this is really what they are for: managing sets of objects.
If that is not an option, the alternative you suggested works fine. Just be careful when invoking clean, as it will then clean the entire schema not just the part for one of your plugins.
I am currently struggling with the same problem: An application which is made of several "base" components which all could have their own database objects.
I tried the option to put all in the same schema and using different flyway meta tables, but this does not work: When flyway comes to process e.g. the second table for the second module and discovers that the schema is not empty (because the first module has migrated its db changes), it stops, as flyway has now no chance to determine the state of the db and its migrations.
Also using base line versions do not help, as in that case the changes of the base line would be skiped for the next modules... I think the only reasonable solution with flyway would be to use different schemas....
I have just started working on entity framework in an ASP.net application and I was wondering if someone could point in the right direction with respect to best practices. I have some questions in particular which I have listed below.
First of all I am using entity framework 4.0. I already have my database created and so I created a class library and generated the entity model from the database. I had been using Guids generated by the database so I had to modify the ssl to include the attribute StoreGeneratedPattern="Identity". Is there a way to do this automatically or do I have to manually edit the ssl everytime I update the database and the model? (For those of you know are facing a problem with guids or want to know why I am doing this.. this is a clear article on the problem with auto generated GUIDs)
I was planning on using a single file in the class library to hold all the database queries. Is this good practice? How would I ensure different programmers dont rewrite the same queries over and over?
I was planning on using a unique context per method. Is this the right way to go? I read through Rick Strahl's post on context lifetime management. But I am still not sure if a unique context per method is the right way to go.
Can I have my database queries as static methods since they do not make use of any instance variables?
If I use a unique context per method as mentioned in 3 and I wish to modify an entity object returned by one context what would be the best practice? Do I use the attach functionality to attach the object to a new context and save the changes ? I havent tried this but I have read a couple of articles and it seems a bit straightforward but wanted to know if there are any alternatives to this.
If you any suggestions on how you use Entity Framework in an ASP.net application I definitely could use help. This is my first ASP.net/Entity framework application so any tips will help
This was issue in initial version of VS 2010. In some cases this should already work correctly once you have VS 2010 SP1 installed. If it doesn't install this KB.
You can easily get huge class with a lot of static methods. Try to use some separation by the entity type you are querying. You will never fully ensure that another programmer will not create the same query again. This is about correct query naming following same naming policy, documentation and communication among programmers.
Unique context "per method" is usually not needed. In most cases you should be happy with unique context per logical (business) transaction - in case of web application logical operation is in most cases single request processing = one context per request.
If you pass context instance to your queries the answer is yes. Once you don't create them as static and they will take context instance from their class instance you will be very close to repository pattern.
This is exactly problem with context per method and it is hard to solve because to make this work you must first detach entity from the first context and attach it to the second context. If your entity has also related entities loaded all these relations will be nulled during detaching (unless you use deep clone instead of detaching = creating second instance of the entity).
How can we extend the Alfresco database? I need to add new tables to the existing database structure.
Does alfresco support this?
thanks in advance,
sri..
I think changing the alfresco db model is never a good solution. Some alfresco upgrades are made using Schema Upgrade Scripts, and that could get messy.
Have you tried to extend the alfresco content model?
Alfresco support some data types, allowing you to persist data. The Web Script framework allow you manipulate all your data inside your content model.
If your data is not suitable for a "content model", I think you should create a new database to hold your data.
Well, it is just a database. So you can create as many new tables as you want just like you would in any other database.
Obviously Alfresco won't use them because it doesn't know them, but you can query the tables as you like.
Advices from alfresco engineers are do not touch alfresco database. Please take a look at this page.
http://forums.alfresco.com/forum/general/non-technical-alfresco-discussion/where-alfreso-user-details-are-stored-i-alfresco
Changing alfresco database is not recommended.Content Model will be the good way.If such requirement is mandatory than,
You can use spring with hibernate for database connection.Properties which is required for connecting database are all ready declared inside alfresco-global.properties which is located inside "tomcat/shared/classes/".
For Spring bean injection you can declare beans inside any file which ends with "-context" which resides inside "tomcat/shared/classes/alfresco/extension" folder.
I will still recommend developer to use content model.
Depending on your use case, you may or may not need to play directly with the[/a] data base. I think your use case should fall in one of the following:
Use case 1:
You need to setup some metadata on folders and/or documents. You may have to nest multiple levels of nodes with different sets of custom metadata on each level.
You probably need to extend alfresco models in order to define custom document/folder models that best suits your business requirements. Please check jpotts' tutorial to learn how to do so.
Use case 2:
You need to define multiple lists with different sets of properties, those lists may or may not be linked to some content in your alfresco repo.
You probably need to learn more about alfresco sites' datalists, once you do so you may be interested in learning how to extend OOTB alfresco content model, jpotts' tutorial would be a good starting point, and then you should be checking this tutorial in order to learn how to manage datalists in stand alone aikau apps/share pages.
Use case 3:
You need to leverage a relational database in order to define and leverage you complex business logic that do not fall in any of the use cases defined above.
Are you sure you do not want to code a brand new app leveraging a technology that you are familiar with and have it communicate with alfresco using RESTfull api/cmis/.... ?
Are you sure alfresco is THE way to go ? If so, and you still want to have your custom complex business model in a bare relational database:
Please consider using a separate database instance / database for your custom extension, this way you would be sure any new patch/upgrade to alfresco that may change database structure won't affect your extension (or at least wont give you hard time upgrading it)
If you are really tied to only 1 database instance / 1 database schema, you will probably want to precede your table names with some prefix and hope none of alfresco future upgrades would have new tables with the same prefix. You probably also need to make sure to manage your database config wisely (connection pools ..) so neither your alfresco instance nor your custom extension have to starve. (make sure you close the connections you are opening)
Alfresco and Activiti come with a database. It is not good to access the database directly. Doing so can cause unexpected locking behavior or exhaust connection pools on the DB. This turns out into performance problems and other kinds of issues are possible too. In case you want to update Alfresco or Activiti you can do it through APIs. Easy to extend, easy to customize and hassle free integration capability are some of the reasons which has made http://loganwinson.doodlekit.com/blog/entry/4249216/top-things-to-know-about-alfresco-development>Alfresco web development popular among businesses.