Is it possible to store instances of a class in a cookie or in shared objects.
Basically in my application I have an object "Diagram" that the user can create. If they hit save, I want to store the current instance as a cookie and allows them to reload it later.
Alternatively, I could see about getting them to store the saved version on the hard disk. But even then, all I want to save and retreive is my actionscript object.
Is this possible?
I've tried storing the object to SharedObject.data.diag, but when I try to retrieve the object from the cookie doing SharedObject.data.diag as Diag returns null.
http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/9780596529857/chapter/ch17.pdf
Page 10: Serialize typed objects.
You may have issues with deep cloning if you have a complex class.
Related
I need a help for while creating the collection the below error is came in server console.How to solve the error ?
Error:
Warning: creating anonymous collection. It will not be saved or synchronized over the network. (Pass null for the collection name to turn off this warning.)
TLDR: you need to provide a collection name as an argument when you create a shared collection.
In most cases, you want to provide a name as a parameter when you define a collection:
Docs = new Meteor.Collection('docs');
When you don't, you create anonymous collection:
Items = new Meteor.Collection();
In the first case, the collection is shared and synchronized between client and server, and the name you've provided is used as a table name in order to store the collection in Mongo.
Anonymous collections are local in the place they've been created. Their contents are never synchronized. Therefore, even if you create such collection in a piece of code that will be run on the server and on the client, those two collections will be separate things: data created on the server won't be visible on client, data created on the client won't be visible on server, and both won't be stored in the database.
There are legitimate use cases for anonymous collections, mostly on the client side when you need to create some temporary data, but want to retain all the benefits of Minimongo and reactivity. However, it's one of those things that are needed rarely and you really do know when you need to do it. It's more probable that a beginner made a mistake and forget to provide the collection name when he wanted to create a typical shared collection. Therefore, the system issues a warning to make sure that you really wanted to do what you just did.
Therefore:
If your goal was to create an anonymous collection, and you know what you're doing, don't worry about that message. It's just a warning, the code will be functional and do what it's told to.
If you wanted to create a normal collection, or are just starting out and don't know what's this all about, just add a parameter to your collection definition.
In my AppStart.cshtml I fetch some data from the database, do calculations, serialize/deserialize json strings and such, etc, and I store the result in a couple AppState-variables by doing something like the following:(C#)
AppState["myVar1"]="aString";
AppState["myVar2"]=anArray;
These variables are accessed frequently and are a bit heavy to define so I thought something like this would make sense rather than creating the data from scratch every time it's needed. Even if the optimization isn't needed it still makes sense to me since it also increases readability and definitely maintainability by not having the same code in a bunch of places where that data is needed.
Likewise, I do similar actions on a per-user basis by putting data in Session whenver a user logs in, e.g.
Session["userVar1"]="myString";
Session["userVar2"]=myAray;
However, I've just read that we should never rely on that the data stored in these still exist when we want to read them because they're stored in the server-memory which might have been cleared.
Is this true?
So when we want to access one of these we should first check whether it's null or not? And if we're lucky it's not null and we can use it straight away, otherwise we set it again.
Is this how data stored in AppState and Session are supposed to be used? And if so, what would be a good way of re-setting them if they're null? I suppose doing something like creating a function which sets them if they're null?
In your case it sounds like it's fine if the data is occasionally cleared by the server (re-starting the app process from IIS, for example) because what you've described is just a caching scenario. Cache data is inherently transient. If it's there, use it. If it's not there, re-fetch it (and populate the cache again with the result).
What I would suggest is abstracting your cache mechanism (app state and session state) from the structure of the cache itself. And within this structure you can check if the data is cached and, if not, re-cache it. Consider an object like this:
public class CacheManager
{
public static string MyString
{
get
{
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(AppState["myVar1"]))
{
// Fetch the value to be cached and set it in AppState["myVar1"]
}
return AppState["myVar1"];
}
}
}
Now anywhere in your application you can get the value by calling:
CacheManager.MyString
The rest of the application doesn't know or care if it's from app state, or session state, or a database, or a file, or any other transient location for cached data. That's entirely handled by the cache manager object. So if you ever want to change where certain values are located, you change them in that one place. Or if, for testing purposes, you want to remove the cache entirely and always get the data live, you'd just swap out the cache manager implementation with one that always returns re-fetched data. The rest of the application is blissfully unaware of the implementation.
Basically I want to make my script service only serialise properties that are not null on an array of object I am returning... So this..
{"k":"9wjH38dKw823","s":10,"f":null,"l":null,"j":null,"p":null,"z":null,"i":null,"c":null,"m":0,"t":-1,"u":2}
would be
{"k":"9wjH38dKw823","s":10,"m":0,"t":-1,"u":2}
Does anyone know if this is possible?
Basically the reason for this is because null values are for unchanged properties. A local copy is kept in the javascript that is just updated to reduce traffic to the server. Change values are then merged.
You can create a custom JavaScriptConverter class for the JSON serialization process to use to handle your object, and then put the necessary logic in the Serialize method of that class to exclude the properties that are null.
This article has a clear step-by-step discussion of the process involved in creating it.
You probably would not need to actually implement the Deserialize method (can throw a NotImplementedException) if you are not passing that type of object in as an input parameter to your web services.
I am using shared object to share data between two users. First user connect to shared object and set some value in shared object. Please consider that second user has not connected with the shared object yet.
Now when second user connects to the server and try to get that property set by first user, he could get shared object but could not get properties of Shared object set by first user. I observed few times that Second user can get these properties within "Sync" event between two users. But I would like to get these values for Second user in any stage (i.e. in load event etc.). Whenever Second user tries to get the property of Shared object, the object will reset the actual property value and then return reset value.
Anyone faced such issue while using shared object between two users. If so, I would appreciate if you could let me know your suggestions for following questions:
1) Is there any way to get all the properties of shared object before sync event called, as I want to get it immediately when second user connect to the application and perform next task based on the values stored in shared object.
2) Is it possible for second user to check whether any property has been set by first user? So that second user can use the property instead of reset it.
Give you a citation from adobe docs:
"The SharedObject class is used to read and store limited amounts of data on a user's computer or on a server.(...)To use remote shared objects, you need Adobe Flash Media Server"
Do you have a server that supports that technology?
I am a VB.net winforms programmer attempting to build an ASP.Net app. I use data classes(objects) through reflection in most of my vb projects and was trying to adapt it to ASP.net using the VB code behind. I have a webpage that serves as an add/edit page for contact info. I instatiate my class which grabs the contact data from the data base then I have a process that loops through the controls on the form and matches up with a property in the data class. I can display data no problem. When I edit data and click the submit button my code calls a then loops through the controls on the form again and matches the control to the property of the data class to update the property of the class. However, my data class is no longer valid. I know web programming is different then winforms but I can't seem to get over the hump on this one. Is this the wrong way to go about this? Is my data class only available on the server side? Do I just reinstantiate the initial class and then loop through the propeties and change what the user changed and then call the update method (see redundant)? How can I get data class into a session object (I made an attempt in the past but was under tight deadlines and had to abandon it, maybe I need to revisit it?)?
Thanks
If you decide to keep some of your data in Session, you owe it to yourself to look at this post. Your code will be much cleaner and easier to maintain.
Yes, you need to reload the data class from the database as one option, or use an alternative approach. The reason is web is stateless, so all local variables are destroyed then the server side page unload process occurs. This means that in between requests, you need something to store your data.
You can read/write an object via the Session colleciton, as so:
Session["A"] = myobj;
myobj = (ObjType)Session["A"];
And so session stores an object for a specific user. Alternatively, cache stores application level data, so one instance of an object is available to all users (where session is unique to each user). You can make cache unique to a user by appending a user ID to the cache string.
var o = Cache.Get("A");
if (o != null) { .. }
Cache.Add("A", o, ...);
And so these mechanisms help you temporarily retain data.
You need to save your data class somewhere, usually in a session variable, otherwise it goes away as soon as the page gets sent back the user. Or else you need to recreate the data class again upon posting.