I have a largish application that runs fine and uses session variables widely
We wish to push it into the cloud and run multiple instances. Unfortunately our cloud partner doesn't offer SSL stick sessions and even if they did, im not sure that would be the way to go.
What I would rather do is not rely on a user maintaining a session on a server and I can achieve this using Client variables.
I'm wondering however if there are any downside, is it overly slow are there certain variable types that dont work with Client variables structs / queries etc?
There are over 1500 lines of code using session variables, and I could just do a search and replace or I do I need to go through hundreds of components and rethink each one.
Yes, client variables are limited in what they can store.
From the docs: Client variables must be simple data types: strings, numbers, lists, Booleans, or date and time values. They cannot be arrays, recordsets, XML objects, query objects, or other objects.
Client variables limited to simple variables like strings, numbers etc. But I do use client variable to store structure and array by serializing to JSON. In many sites I have used to client variable to remember form field values (specially search criteria) so when user come back we can get them their last status.
What I just need to do that while storing into client serialize it and to get it back deserialize.
Hope this help
Related
A co-worker and I have been discussed the best way to store data in memory within our C++ server. Basically, we need to store all requisitions made by clients. Those requisitions come as JSONs objects, so each requisition may have different number of parameters. Later, clients can ask the server for a list of those requisitions.
The total number of requisitions is small (order of 10^3). Clients ask for the list of requisitions using pagination.
So my question is what is the standard way of doing that?
1) Create a class that stores every JSON and then, when requested, send the list of those JSONs.
2) Deserialize the JSON, store it in a class then serialize the data again when requested.
If 2, what is the best way of doing that in modern C++?
3) Another option?
Thank you.
If the client asks you to support JSON, the are only two steps you need to do:
Add some JSON (e.g this) library with a suitable license to project.
Use it.
If the implementation of JSON is not the main goal of the project, this should work.
Note: you can also get a lot of design hints inspecting the aforementioned repo.
Are there any tried/true methods of managing your own sequential integer field w/o using SQL Server's built in Identity Specification? I'm thinking this has to have been done many times over and my google skills are just failing me tonight.
My first thought is to use a separate table to manage the IDs and use a trigger on the target table to manage setting the ID. Concurrency issues are obviously important, but insert performance is not critical in this case.
And here are some gotchas I know I need to look out for:
Need to make sure the same ID isn't doled out more than once when
multiple processes run simultaneously.
Need to make sure any solution to 1) doesn't cause deadlocks
Need to make sure the trigger works properly when multiple records are
inserted in a single statement; not only for one record at a time.
Need to make sure the trigger only sets the ID when it is not already
specified.
The reason for the last bullet point (and the whole reason I want to do this without an Identity Specification field in the first place) is because I want to seed multiple environments at different starting points and I want to be able to copy data between each of them so that the ID for a given record remains the same between environments (and I have to use integers; I cannot use GUIDs).
(Also yes, I could set identity insert on/off to copy data and still use a regular Identity Specification field but then it reseeds it after every insert. I could then use DBCC CHECKIDENT to reseed it back to where it was, but I feel the risk with this solution is too great. It only takes one time for someone to make a mistake and then when we realize it, it would be a real pain to repair the data... probably enough pain that it would have made more sense just to do what I'm doing now in the first place).
SQL Server 2012 introduced the concept of a SEQUENCE database object - something like an "identity" column, but separate from a table.
You can create and use sequence from your code, you can use the values in various place, and more.
See these links for more information:
Sequence numbers (MS Docs)
CREATE SEQUENCE statement (MS Docs)
SQL Server SEQUENCE basics (Red Gate - Joe Celko)
I was wondering if I can use the here-api to geocode addresses (bulk way) and store the results. I need to store them on a python data frame to afterwards merge them with a shape file. However, in the TOS HERE says that you cannot store the results from geocoding.
I've been in your situation. Let me list the options that we've considered.
You could fetch address information dynamically using their Geocoding API. Advantage is that you'll always have up-to-date information, and you don't need to query places that you'll never use anyway.
I'm assuming that your shape file is based on HERE data. You could still try to use OpenStreetMaps. You'll get some inaccuracies if the map data differs, but it's free, and not as restrictive as HERE.
You could opt to buy the HERE map data, to work around the TOS restrictions
By the way, we went for an option 4: switching to OpenStreetMaps entirely, but it sounds like you don't have that luxery, because you have to work with existing shapefiles that you want to "enrich".
I am writing a C++ program, I have a class that provides services for the rest of the clases in the program.
I am writing now the clases and the UML.
1) the class that I refer to has a task list that is changing over time and conditions are being checked on this list, I am thinking to keep it in a table in a databasse that every line in the table would represent a task, this way in case that the program crashes or stops working I can restore the last situation, the other option is to keep the task list in memory and keep a copy in the database.
the task list should be searched every second
Which approach is more recommended?
2) In order to write and to read to the database I can call the database directly from the class or build a database communication class, if I write a data communication class I need to give specific options and to build a mini server for this,
e.g. write a line to the database, read a line to the database, update only the first column etc..
what is the recommended approach for this?
Thanks.
First, if the database is obvious and easy, and there are no performance problems, just do that. You're talking about running a query once/second, and maybe marking a task done or adding a new one every so often; even sqlite on a slow SMB share should be able to handle that just fine.
If you do need to optimize it, then there are two approaches: Either still with the database and cache it in-memory, or use memory as your primary storage and come up with a persistence mechanism that uses the database. But until you need to optimize it, don't.
Next, how should you do it? Your question makes it sound like you're thinking in terms of a whole three-tier system, with a "mini-server" sitting between the database server and your task list. There's really no need for that. What you want is a bespoke ORM, but that makes it sound more complicated than it is. All you're doing is writing a class that wraps a database connection and provides a handful of methods—get_due, mark_done, add, get_next_id—each of which maps SQL parameters to Task members. For example (with no error handling):
void mark_done(Task task) {
db.execute("UPDATE Task SET done=true WHERE id=%s", task.id);
}
Three more methods like that, plus a constructor to connect to the database (including creating the Task table if it didn't already exist), and your class is done.
The reason you don't want to write the database stuff directly into Task is that you don't really have anywhere to store shared information like the database connection object; either you need globals (or class attributes, which are effectively globals), or you need copies in every single Task instance (or, really, weak references—which you're going to fake with either a reference or a raw pointer, either way leading to shutdown problems somewhere down the line).
Finally, your whole reason for doing this is error recovery, and databases do a great job of journaling so nothing ever gets inconsistent, but you do have to make sure to structure your app to take advantage of that. For example, you may want to mark all the now-due tasks "in process", then process them, then mark them all "done"; that way, at recovery time, you know exactly which tasks may or may not have been done, and can act appropriately. The more steps you can commit to the database, the less data loss you have to deal with—but of course the more code you have to write, and the slower it gets. So, do as much as necessary, but no more.
Saving information in Database just to recover crashed information may be bit of an overkill.
You ideally want to serialize the list and save it - as binary, xml or csv based values. This can be done based on a timer or certain events in your applications.
Databases may also be used if you can come up with a structure that looks exactly similar to tables - so that you can do one-to-one mapping between the objects and probably write SQL queries easily. But keep that on a separate layer for abstraction.
I'm trying to think of the correct design for a web service. Essentially, this service is going to perform a client search in a number of disparate systems, and return the results.
Now, a client can have various pieces of information attached - e.g. various pieces of contact information, their address(es), personal information. Some of this information may be complex to retrieve from some systems, so if the consumer isn't going to use it, I'd like them to have some way of indicating that to the web service.
One obvious approach would be to have different methods for different combinations of wanted detail - but as the combinations grow, so too do the number of methods. Another approach I've looked at is to add two string array parameters to the method call, where one array is a list of required items (e.g. I require contact information), and the other is optional items (e.g. if you're going to pull in their names anyway, you might as well return that to me).
A third approach would be to add additional methods to retrieve the detail. But that's going to explode the number of round trips if I need all the details for potentially hundreds of clients who make up the result.
To be honest, I'm not sure I like any of the above approaches. So how would you design such a generic client search service?
(Considered CW since there might not be a single "right" answer, but I'll wait and see what sort of answers arrive)
Create a "criteria" object and use that as a parameter. Such an object should have a bunch of properties to indicate the information you want. For example "IncludeAddresses" or "IncludeFullContactInformation".
The consumer is then responsible to set the right properties to true, and all combinations are possible. This will also make the code in the service easier to do. You can simply write if(criteria.IncludeAddresses){response.Addresses = GetAddresses;}
Any non-structured or semi-structured data is best handled by XML. You might pass XML data via a string or wrap it up in a class adding some functionality to it. Use XPathNavigator to go through XML. You can also use XMLDocument class although it is not too friendly to use. Anyway, you will need some kind of class to handle XML content of course.
That's why XML was invented - to handle data which structure is not clearly defined.
Regards,
Maciej