Handle model dependencies in Laravel Repository Pattern - laravel

I'm discovering the Repository Pattern for my Laravel project but I have to say that I'm a bit lost once a model has several dependencies and the examples on the web are always basic and don't answer the question for more complex use cases.
Let's imagine a user on my app. He can have badges, he has different things on the app that will be slightly modified when he first performs the action (when he first sees the comments, I tell him once the different things he can do, etc), he has several "counters" to record the number of comments he made, the number of friends he invited, without having to count each entry each time.
My database looks like this:
users table:
id
pseudo
name
password
...
badges table:
user_id
badge1_xxxxxx
badge2_xxxxxx
...
I have a very limited number of badges so I decided to create a column for each of them and as soon as a user wins a badge, I get his entry (in OneToOne relationship) and I indicate that the badge in question has been won.
onboarding table:
user_id
seen_comments (boolean)
seen_results (boolean)
...
As you can see, I store each action I'd like the user to do in different columns and as soon as he has done one and I've been able to modify my app accordingly (by showing him an arrow, etc), I put the column in question to true.
user_counters table:
user_id
count_comments
count_invited_friends
...
I don't consider a user to be a user if he doesn't have an entry in each of the tables (I could have done everything in one table but the users table seemed to me to become huge). The only relationship used is OneToOne between the user and the table in question.
Should I do this ?
class UserRepository {
public function register($data) {
// Create the user
$user = User::create($data);
// Create all its dependencies which are required if I want to consider the user as fully registered in my DB
$user->badges()->create();
$user->onboarding()->create();
$user->counter()->create();
// Return the user
return $user;
}
}
Or should I create a Repository for each of these elements and create the entire user in a UserService ?
How far should I separate things and when does it become overkill?
Is there something that I don't understand in concept of Repository ? If so, could you give me some links that you found useful because I feel like I ran out of ideas for search keywords.
Thanks

Related

Laravel many-to-many

I've Googled for a while and found multiple threads discussing problems like this, but I just can't get my head around how to do exactly what I want to do, hope someone can point me in the correct direction.
I'm making a learning platform in Laravel. What I want right now is that when lesson A is completed by someone belonging to workplace B a notification should be sent to user C. So I have made a table notification_receivers containing lesson_id, workplace_id, and user_id, pointing to the respective tables.
Of course, I also have the corresponding models (User, Lesson, Workplace) set up, but what I can't understand is exactly how to set up the model relations. I'm currently making the Blade template used for editing the notification receivers belonging to a particular lesson, and I need to make the following: Get all notification receiver users for this lesson and then for every one of those users, get the related workplaces.
My first try was this in the Lesson model:
public function notification_receivers(): BelongsToMany
{
return $this->belongsToMany('App\User', 'notification_receivers')->withPivot(["workplace_id"]);
}
Which of course doesn't work straight off, since some users will be returned multiple times (once for each workplace). How do I do to get every user just once?
And when I have my users, how do I get the workplaces for each user? If I get it to work, the withPivot above will give me the IDs, but how do I get a collection of the Workplaces?

How to have a User Account for different entities in Spring JPA?

I'm making a system (using Spring + JPA with MySQL) that shows the best applicants for a certain job offer. The company and the applicants have their respective user account, and with that, they can fill in their personal/company information and their job profile/job offer conditions. With that, the system should match the job conditions (like 3+ years of experience in C) with the applicant's job profile.
My problem is that the User Account is created first, and should be independent, but these two different entities (Applicant and Company), with different attributes, are using it. So if I do something like create an applicant and company in the User Account, one of them will be always null.
How can I solve this? I guess the problem would be something like: how to implement a user account that can hold data from different entities that have different attributes (therefore, can't be grouped)? (In fact, I need one more entity, but I tried to simplify it to illustrate the problem more clearly).
I think, you should make marker interface, like public interface UserAccountable or smth. Implement this interface in your Applicant and Company classes. Then you can make a field in UserAccount class, like private UserAccountable someUser; and throught setters and getters you can assign and get this variable to Applicant or Company.
Hope this helps!
I found what I needed here: https://thoughts-on-java.org/complete-guide-inheritance-strategies-jpa-hibernate/
The problem was the mapping, not the class design per se. I could create interfaces and abstract classes to solve it in the Java world, but in the SQL world that's not possible, so the mapping is the key. In this case, I was looking for the Joined table mapping, but I realized I needed it just to not have null fields in my UserAccount, because I don't need a polymorphic query (e.g. give me the names of every 'user type' (Person, Company)), and it would be too costly performance wise to implement it that way, so I'll trade off space for performance, and I'll just reference all three user types in the User Account, leaving two of those three fields null forever.
PS: Single table mapping won't help because I do need to use not null conditions.

Limit to 1 on hasMany-relationship

I have two models that are related to each other. One model contains users, and the other contains all courses and related timestamp of class start. Now the "related key" between them are the 'user_id' which are in both tables. I manage to get out data when having:
return $this->hasMany(ClassInfo::class,'user_id','user_id');
This works just fine. However, since I use the model in a with clause I need to the only one of the classes that starts a given time if start time crashes with another course for the user. I have tried with both:
return $this->hasMany(ClassInfo::class,'user_id','user_id')->take(1);
return $this->hasMany(ClassInfo::class,'user_id','user_id')->limit(1);
But both just give me empty collections, I don't see why that happends?
Is there any way that I can make it return for example the one with the biggest id value from the Class table (id is auto incremental for each course registered on a user).
Thanks for any tips and guidance!

Achieve one to many relationship Spring MVC

I am trying to achieve one to many relationship. I know how to do basic one to many relationship between requestor id and userid.
My question is How to refer gtlUserId(resourceRequestTable) to gtlUserId (User table) as by default spring is mapping gtlUserId (resourceRequestTable) to userId in user table
It has some Ways.
I think you should give a specific way during all project !
As My experience each many to one must be a Drop Down in Client side .
However in your Table ResourceTypeEntity should be drop down inside ResourceRequesTable when value of option is Id[primary Key].
Also Your table not seems good design why two many to one map to same table? it may cause 3NF problem in DB also pay attention Cascade it when Parent Table related to other Parent is not good Design ,Keep it simple with uni Direction Many to One And force user to delete manually parent is better ,CaseCade Delete when Parent has related to other table will make exception handling and testing too hard.
please take a look https://examples.javacodegeeks.com/enterprise-java/spring/mvc/spring-mvc-dropdown-box-example/

Do I need to use state pattern for data approval process?

Users of our system are able to submit un-validated contact data. For example:
Forename: null
Surname: 231
TelephoneNumber: not sure
etc
This data is stored in a PendingContacts table.
I have another table - ApprovedContacts. This table has a variety of constraints to improve consistency and integrity. This table shouldn't contain any dirty or incomplete data.
I need a process to move data from one table to another. Structure of both tables is nearly identical, however, one table has the constraints, when another doesn't.
I have two states: Pending and Approved, gut feeling tells me that I should use a state pattern details here. In theory this should allow me to change contact's state from Pending to Approved, depending on whether the contact has been successfully validated. Problem is that I don't see how is this going to work.
Am I going in a right direction or should I be looking at something completely different?
Presentation layer is in MVC 3, so I have view models for pending contacts and approved contacts, as well as domain models for pending contacts and approved contacts. My view models are generally DTOs with some validation routines, but now my view models represent state too. This doesn't seem right.
For example, all contacts must have a state and they can be saved and removed , so I need an interface for that:
public interface IContactViewModelState
{
void Save(ContactViewModel item);
}
I then add an implementation for saving pending contacts into the PendingContacts table:
public class PendingContactViewModelState: IContactViewModelState
{
public void Save(ContactViewModel item)
{
// Save to the pending contacts table
// I don't like this as my view model now references data access layer
}
}
Short answer: no, because you only have two states. You'd use a state pattern to help deal with complex situations with many states and rules. The only reason you might want to go with a full-blown state pattern based implementation is if you there's a very high chance such a situation is imminent.
If the result of a success transition to Approved is the record ending up in the approved table then you really just need to decide where you want to enforce the constraints. This decision will/can be based on many factors including the likely frequency of change (to the constraints) and where other logic resides.
A lot of patterns (but not all) tend to deal with how to structure an application, but here I think it's just a case of deciding where and how implementing some logic. In other words - you might just be accidentally over-analyzing the problem - it's easily done :)

Resources