Re: Definitely solved: More SharedEC woes: relationships into SEC not saved with more EOF stacks
Re: Definitely solved: More SharedEC woes: relationships into SEC not saved with more EOF stacks
- Subject: Re: Definitely solved: More SharedEC woes: relationships into SEC not saved with more EOF stacks
- From: René Bock via Webobjects-dev <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 10:53:26 +0000
- Thread-topic: Definitely solved: More SharedEC woes: relationships into SEC not saved with more EOF stacks
Hi,
if you are using multiple ObjectStores in one WO-Application, you should set
er.extensions.eof.ERXObjectStoreCoordinatorSynchronizer.localNotifyOfRemoteUpdates
= true
to ensure, that changes are propagated between the different object stores.
Because of Wonder Issue #866, you should use a rather fresh version of Wonder (
> 17-7-2018)
Am 14.01.2020 um 18:34 schrieb OCsite via Webobjects-dev
<email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>>:
Chuck,
On 14 Jan 2020, at 6:31, Chuck Hill
<email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
On Jan 13, 2020, at 5:42 AM, OCsite <email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
Do you have multiple EOF stacks (multiple EOObjectStoreCoordinator instances)?
Hmmm... yup, in most of my apps, I use for years and years
er.extensions.ERXObjectStoreCoordinatorPool.maxCoordinators=3
Let me see, I'll try without ... and just again, you are right! When this is
commented out from Properties, relationships to SEC get saved properly (without
the convoluted databaseContextWillOrderAdaptorOperations delegate of course).
Can you please explain how this relates? I must be missing something of
importance, but I can't see any sense in that :( How on earth might the sole
existence of a couple of other (far as I know, pretty independent) EOF stacks
affect the way an EODBOp creates its newRows?!? :-O
I’ve never been much of an SEC user. The EOSharedEditingContext is an
EOEditingContext and so it is associated with one EOObjectStoreCoordinator.
What I will guess is that the OSC of the SEC instance is != the OSC of the
EOEditingContext you are using and there is a bug because the relationship
crosses OSCs. I doubt that is fixable, but you might find some way to use that
to come up with a better hack. Assuming that I am correct.
As always, indeed, correct you are.
Since my app makes sure to use only one of all the coordinators for the normal
work and for sessions (keeping the rest of coordinators from the pool solely
for my background tasks), I was pretty sure this can't happen... until I tried
to log out the coordinators, and indeed, they did differ. Seems the SEC
coordinator gets assigned in some weird way.
With fixing, I am afraid I am outta luck; one possibility would be to get rid
of the SEC altogether, another probably the delegate hack which works around
the problem — for having revisited the app meantime, alas, I recalled I can't
do without those extra coordinators for the background tasks. Some of them
could write many objects into DB, and alas, I can't let the users in normal
sessions wait for that long :(
I do wonder of the speed difference in practice: one coordinator would
definitely make the app somewhat slower; on the other hand, SEC itself should
speed it up, removing a need of many DB roundtrips... hm, perhaps it would be
better just to forget maxCoordinators and stay at the safe side.
There is some EO cache in Wonder that I have used instead of the SEC to keep
EOs easy to get. I forget the name now. It is not quite as convenient but
less magic might yield better results.
For the moment, I am using both. The EO cache you mean would probably be
ERXEnterpriseObjectArrayCache? I am using the thing pretty widely to cache
normal EOs to lower the number of DB roundtrips needed (nevertheless it seems
the turning the cached GIDs to objects is rather at the slow side too, and I am
considering to extend the code to try to cache the objects themselves while
there's a memory galore in some sort of a weak map — incidentally, to all, has
someone already tried that? I haven't found this kind of cache in ERX; either
it does not exist, or I have searched improperly.)
SEC serves for my „static“ objects, which are never changed (more precisely,
they might be changed in a special task upon launch, before the first session
is created; and never ever again). A majority of these „static“ objects then
are shared by essentially all sessions — in my current application there's lots
of those, which is also the very reason I have started to use SEC at all (for
the first time in twenty-odd years of using WO ;))
For this very reason I would rather like to keep the SEC, far as it proves
manageable; but of course, we'll see...
This might be of use too:
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/WebObjects/EOF/Using_EOF/Caching_and_Freshness#EOEntity's_Cache-In-Memory_Setting
Thanks! I have considered that, too; but I have eventually chosen SEC because
it not only caches, but also ensures the objects are actually shared betw. all
sessions. Far as I understand, in-memory entities would cause each session to
have its own full cache of all the „static“ objects, which might be a bit of a
memory problem with more users working with the app at once.
Perhaps it was a wrong decision and the memory waste would be a cost well worth
of not bumping into those SEC quirks...
Thanks again,
OC
On Jan 12, 2020, at 4:13 PM, OCsite via Webobjects-dev
<email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
I think I have probably solved the original problem (quoted below) all right,
for the record, by doing essentially this in the
databaseContextWillOrderAdaptorOperations delegate method:
1. go through all the database operations; for each of them
2. go through all the relationships of the DBOp object; find those which lead
into SEC
3. for each such relationship check whether changesFromCommittedSnapshot
contain a value for its name
4. if so, check whether DBOp's rowDiffs have the proper target PK[*] for
the rel source attribute name (it never seems to happen!)
5. if not, add it to a mutable copy of DBOp's newRow
6. having processed all the rels, if anything was added, change DBOp's newRow
and call the DBContext private (ick!) method
createAdaptorOperationsForDatabaseOperation
7. having processed all the DBOps, call the DBContext private (another ick)
method orderAdaptorOperations and return its value from the delegate method.
[*] my models happen to contain only simple FK->PK relships to SEC;
considerably more generic and complex code would be needed for all the possible
cases of course.
That seems to — with by far not exhaustive testing — save the changes into the
database properly.
Quite non-trivial code for simple
saving-of-relationship-as-set-in-object-graph-into-DB.
I wonder. Is it perhaps a big no-no to use and edit relationships from normal
ECs into the SEC? I thought those are fully supported (unlike the other
direction). Or do I just do something terribly wrong somewhere in my
application, for this should work all right?
Does anyone here use this setup (creating/updating EOs with one-way
relationships into SEC), and does it work properly for you without all this
hassle?
Thanks,
OC
On 11 Jan 2020, at 3:28, OCsite via Webobjects-dev
<email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>> wrote:
Hi there,
this is weird. My EOs have some relationships into the SharedEC — of course,
one-way without an inverse; I understand that relationships to SEC are all
right, only those from it outside are forbidden. (Am I wrong perhaps? If those
relationships were set up in the database without SEC, it works perfectly.)
Nevertheless, when I run with SEC, whatever I try, it seems these relationships
are — silently and without reporting any problem — not saved.
Say, I have an EO foo of entity Foo with two simple :1 relationships: a (based
on FK a_id) into a normal-EC entity, and b (based on FK b_id) into a shared-EC
entity. Both are modelled the same way (simple join from the FK in the source
entity to the PK of the target entity). I set both of them, like this:
===
ERXEC ec=....
Foo foo=new Foo()
ec.insertObject(foo)
assert ec==someObject.editingContext()
foo.a=someObject
assert ec.sharedEditingContext()==someSharedObject.editingContext()
foo.b=someSharedObject
assert foo.b==someSharedObject
ec.saveChanges()
===
Now, changes are saved, no error is reported, new object is properly inserted
into the database
- its a_id is filled by someObject's PK
- whilst its b_id is filled by NSKeyValueCoding$Null!
Same happens when editing: the relationships to SEC when changed never seem to
save the appropriate FK value. It seems completely ignored by the saving
process:
===
assert
foo.editingContext().sharedEditingContext()==anotherSharedObject.editingContext()
foo.b=anotherSharedObject
assert foo.b==anotherSharedObject
assert foo.committedSnapshotValueForKey('b')==NSKeyValueCoding$Null
assert foo.changesFromCommittedSnapshot==[b: anotherSharedObject]
foo.editingContext().saveChanges()
assert foo.b==null
===
other changes of foo (if any) are saved all right, but its b_id never changes.
No error is reported.
Does this make any sense, is it perhaps an expected behaviour? As always, I
might be overlooking something of importance, but this feels completely wrong
to me. Could it be caused by some bug at my side? If so, any idea where and how
to hunt for it?
Thanks a lot for any insight,
OC
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list
(email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list
(email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list
(email@hidden<mailto:email@hidden>)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
René Bock
--
Telefon: +49 69 650096 18
salient GmbH, Lindleystraße 12, 60314 Frankfurt
Telefon Zentrale: 069 / 65 00 96 - 0 |
www.salient-doremus.de<http://www.salient-doremus.de>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden