to keep memory overhread low only the last visisted page is stored in http session. the rest of the pages are spooled to disk for long-term storage in case the user uses the back button, and are cleaned up on session expiration.
-igor On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Chris Colman <chr...@stepaheadsoftware.com> wrote: > When you say "offline storage" do you mean that the user has chosen to > save pages for future offline reference or do you mean a more > 'automated' process that wicket performs when system memory becomes too > low? > > Chris > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Igor Vaynberg [mailto:igor.vaynb...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 11:43 AM >> To: users@wicket.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's compatible with > the >> solution in "Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model"? >> >> well, this is why salve removes the dependency field to at least help >> with those. >> >> other then that you can use a loadabledetachablemodel to release the >> reference when the page is not used. >> >> -igor >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Chris Colman >> <chr...@stepaheadsoftware.com> wrote: >> > Is that controllable? >> > >> > What if I have complex object models referenced from wicket UI >> > components that I don't want (can't reasonably with Java's non > optimal >> > serialization) serialized? >> > >> > If we're serializing for offline storage aren't we going to require > the >> > underlying model objects to get serialized as well? >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> serialization in the context when you need to serialize the object > - >> >> eg wicket serializes its pages for offline storage, etc. >> >> >> >> -igor >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Chris Colman >> >> <chr...@stepaheadsoftware.com> wrote: >> >> > Another extremely light weight IoC with ORM wrapping (JDO and >> > Hibernate) >> >> > is exPOJO at http://www.expojo.com >> >> > >> >> > No need for old fashioned DAOs etc., just POJOs being persisted >> >> > transparently the way they should be. >> >> > >> >> > In terms of serialization: >> >> > >> >> > Is that for the purpose of scaling in a cluster environment? I > vote >> > for >> >> > 'session affinity' every time - it's almost necessary when you > have >> >> > anything more sophisticated than an anemic domain model. Do you >> > really >> >> > want to be shifting complex object models from server to server > via >> >> > serialization? >> >> > >> >> > If it's not for a cluster environment but for a single server to >> > allow >> >> > stale sessions to be swapped out then let the garbage collection >> > clean >> >> > out the ORM's object cache instead. >> >> > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> From: Igor Vaynberg [mailto:igor.vaynb...@gmail.com] >> >> >> Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 3:38 AM >> >> >> To: users@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's > compatible >> > with >> >> > the >> >> >> solution in "Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model"? >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Kent Larsson >> >> > <kent.lars...@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > Nice! I think Salve looks great! And it solves more than this >> >> > problem, >> >> >> > I like the design by contract module too as it allows me to >> > validate >> >> >> > parameters in a bit more declarative way. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Do you think Salve is ready to be used in production? I'm a > bit >> >> >> > concerned by "Although already usable, Salve is still in its >> >> > infancy. >> >> >> > Not all features have been implemented and not all problems >> > worked >> >> >> > out.". I only see one open issue and it doesn't seem too major >> > for >> >> > me >> >> >> > to pick it up. >> >> >> >> >> >> we have been using it in production for a while without any >> > problems. >> >> >> i just need to find the time to update the website text :) >> >> >> >> >> >> > If I'm not mistaken Salve may be used (for lots of things, but >> > one >> >> > is) >> >> >> > to solve serialization issues with Spring beans in Wicket >> >> > components? >> >> >> > But isn't that the same issue that the Wicket IOC and it's >> >> > @SpringBean >> >> >> > annotation solves? >> >> >> >> >> >> wicket ioc can only take it so far. because it has to generate a >> > proxy >> >> >> there are limitations to what classes can be proxies - eg no > final >> >> >> methods, default constructor, etc. salve doesnt use a proxy so > it >> >> >> doesnt have any problems. >> >> >> >> >> >> although small, wicket ioc does have an overhead of having to >> >> >> serialize the proxy with the componnet. since salve removes the >> > field >> >> >> it has no such overhead, this is more important when you are >> > returning >> >> >> large resultsets of entities that use dependencies. >> >> >> >> >> >> > If that's the case: Could I use Spring to inject my entities > with >> >> >> > DAO's for now, and use the @SpringBean annotation on those as >> > well >> >> > in >> >> >> > my Wicket components (In those cases I have entities as class >> > vars)? >> >> >> > And the @SpringBean will solve the serialization issue? >> >> >> >> >> >> you can use whatever works for you. salve is an alternative :) >> >> >> >> >> >> > By just looking at Salve a bit it seems I could migrate to > Salve >> > in >> >> >> > two steps that way. And it might be a pretty smooth path to > take? >> > It >> >> >> > would mean that I inject 1000 entities for no good reason. But > if >> > I >> >> >> > see a performance problem in doing so I could just migrate to >> > Salve? >> >> >> > By smooth path I mean that I would have access to my DAO's in > my >> >> >> > entities and would essentially only change the dependency >> >> > annotations >> >> >> > and setup Salve. >> >> >> >> >> >> as long as you do not use spring-specific injection rules you >> > should >> >> >> be fine. salve uses lookup by type primarily, but also does have >> >> >> @SpringBeanId that can be used as a qualifier. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Of course, if Salve is production ready. Then could I throw > out >> >> > Wicket >> >> >> > IOC and the @SpringBean annotation and use Salve instead to > solve >> >> >> > serialization issues? In this case I would use Salve for my >> >> >> > presentation/Wicket -layer as well as dependency injection in > my >> >> >> > entities and Spring as I already do for my service/business >> > -layer >> >> > and >> >> >> > my persistence/DTO -layer. Or would it be nicer to have Salve >> > handle >> >> >> > dependencies in the last two layers as well? >> >> >> >> >> >> we use salve to inject across all layers. it gives you a > consistent >> >> >> approach to use and mock in unit tests. we have a spring context >> > that >> >> >> contains true services - eg session factory, mail sender, credit >> > card >> >> >> processor, etc. all of our domain model then uses salve to > inject >> >> >> these wherever needed. >> >> >> >> >> >> -igor >> >> >> >> >> >> > A lot of questions and text. Thanks for reading this far! :-) >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Best regards, Kent >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Igor Vaynberg >> >> > <igor.vaynb...@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> this is why i built salve.googlecode.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> you can easily hook it into spring and have all your objects >> > (doman >> >> >> >> objects or wicket components) injected via @Dependency > without >> >> >> >> worrying about serialization issues or eager injection - eg > if >> > you >> >> >> >> load a result set of 1000 hibernate entities that need > injection >> >> > you >> >> >> >> dont want all those injected for no reason. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -igor >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Kent Larsson >> >> > <kent.lars...@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi, >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Our current architecture: >> >> >> >>> --- >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> We're currently using a 3-tier architecture (presentation, >> >> >> >>> service/business and persistence) consisting of Wicket (+ a >> > little >> >> >> >>> Spring), Spring and Spring + Hibernate: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Wicket: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Does presentation, we're not inside a transaction / > Hibernate >> >> > session >> >> >> >>> so all used fields must be loaded by Spring. We call Spring >> >> > singleton >> >> >> >>> beans and annotate those fields with @SpringBean. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Spring: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> In the service layer we have Spring singleton beans, > services, >> >> > which >> >> >> >>> are called from the Wicket layer. We have our transaction / >> >> > Hibernate >> >> >> >>> session boundary at this layer. We call DAO's from this > layer. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Spring + Hibernate: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Our DAO's are Spring singleton beans which performs database >> >> >> >>> operations using HibernateTemplate. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> And common to all the layers are our entities. We use the >> > @Entity >> >> >> >>> annotation on them (not XML), from the Wicket layer we just > use >> >> > the >> >> >> >>> accessor methods making sure that the relevant fields are >> > loaded >> >> > (as >> >> >> >>> we would get an exception if they were Lazy and not yet >> > loaded). >> >> > Our >> >> >> >>> entities are stupid, they lack logic and are used mostly > like a >> >> > struct >> >> >> >>> in C/C++. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> I think the general pattern is pretty common for Java EE and >> >> > Spring >> >> >> >>> based web applications (feel free to disagree!). Yet it's >> >> > classified >> >> >> >>> as an anti-pattern by Martin Fowler as we are using mostly >> >> > procedural >> >> >> >>> programming and have an anemic domain model ( >> >> >> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anemic_Domain_Model ). >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> What I would like: >> >> >> >>> --- >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> I would like to use a more OOP approach and have logic in > our >> >> > current >> >> >> >>> entities, creating a rich domain model. For that to work in > all >> >> > cases >> >> >> >>> they need to be able to load and save data. I would still > use a >> >> > Spring >> >> >> >>> singleton bean's for different services. But instead of >> > changing >> >> > the >> >> >> >>> entities like structs they would be rich objects capable of >> >> > chaning >> >> >> >>> themself's and other objects. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> I found this article very interesting: >> >> >> >>> > http://www.nofluffjuststuff.com/blog_detail.jsp?rssItemId=96860 >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> But how would something like that work with Wicket? Could I >> > just >> >> > use >> >> >> >>> @SpringBean like I'm currently doing but use it on both >> > "entities" >> >> > and >> >> >> >>> Spring singleton services? >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> For me this has a purely practical benefit, as I could use > some >> >> >> >>> inheritance in the domain object model to create different >> >> > variations >> >> >> >>> of logic and not just data. Wicket feels quite agile and > nice >> > to >> >> > work >> >> >> >>> with, but I still feel that the current architecture is a > bit >> >> > stale >> >> >> >>> and seldom supports elegant OO solutions (that said, of > course >> >> > things >> >> >> >>> can still be solved elegantly, I just think it would be > easier >> > if >> >> > I >> >> >> >>> could do it in a more OO oriented way). >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Comments? What are the pros and cons of this kind of >> > architecture? >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> All comments are greatly appreciated! >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Best regards, Kent >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: > users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> >> >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> >> >> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.44/2140 - Release > Date: >> >> > 05/28/09 >> >> >> 18:09:00 >> >> > >> >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> >> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.44/2140 - Release Date: >> > 05/28/09 >> >> 18:09:00 >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.44/2140 - Release Date: > 05/28/09 >> 18:09:00 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
