I'm a spring newby (been baby sitting an ERP tool for the past 5 years). Anyway, I've got a few of the sample apps (petstore/etc) running, got spring security basics figured out, and am ready to start a new project. My question is, are there any best practices for "breaking apart" the site into different webapps.
For example, the project will have the standard web stuff (/contactus, /about, etc), a user area (/myprofile, etc), and an admin section (/admin/users, etc). Is it generally the practice to roll all of this into one webapp, or I was thinking about possibly removing all of the admin functionality to a separate webapp. Other than being able to keep the admin site running while the other stuff is down for maintenance, is there any reason for breaking apart the project? Any best practices to be observed here?
Any advice would be appreciated.
I would recommend splitting your web application where it makes sense. As you already have mentioned, splitting a web application comes with the (quite huge) benefit that you can have parts of the site running while updating other parts. Other advantages to splitting the web application are:
Quicker development, smaller web applications will be quicker to deploy in a test environment or embedded container.
Easier dependency management, you avoid having a large web application that depends on all your other projects.
You will have a more secure site, there is less risk of information leaking from one application to the other (e.g. admin information leaking to the customer site) than if you have everything in one big application.
...
How to split a web project depends on the project (of course), but try to find areas where you see a clear sepration from the rest of the web application.
Related
I am trying to integrate spring-mvc and reactjs, but it's too poor example, but I like flux architect of reactjs so that i strongly want to integrate reactjs with springmvc!
I want to use reactjs as a client side, springmvc as a rest backend. Can you provide me some example or tutorial to do this? I've searched on google but it's very poor result. Please help me.
Thanks you very much
This answer might not be what you want, but I would advise you not to integrate the two of them. If they communicate over HTTP/WebSockets, they are already decoupled, and it might just cause you pain to couple them.
Advantages of decoupling the frontend and backend into separate projects:
People with experience only in React or Spring can contribute without getting confused by the other stuff.
The tooling/build you need for a Spring project is quite different from what you need for a frontend project, and mixing this into one code base can get pretty confusing.
If they're decoupled from the start, it gets easier to add other clients that use the backend API. By having them as separate projects, you're less likely to develop the backend in a way that's very tied to the frontend.
The frontend and the backend should use different versions and be shippable independently of each other. What if the backend team is currently doing a major refactoring, but the frontend team just fixed a critical bug and wants to ship a new release?
As soon as you add asset caching to your frontend project (like putting the files on a CDN, using the HTML5 application cache or the new Service Worker API), you have to prepared for getting requests to your backend from "old" clients. By separating them, it's easier to think about and plan for stuff like that on the backend.
I could probably list a couple of more benefits, but these are the ones I consider has the largest impact. There are of course some benefits of integrating the two of them, but those tend to get smaller and smaller as the project grows/matures.
I have a ERP project with modules stock, purchases and sales. These are web applications, using hibernate, maven, springMVC and spring security. What is the best way to organize the structure of this project?
1 - Each application being a web module(.WAR);
2- Just one web module.
On both approach there are other modules: core(with daos and services), and commons(with shared utils classes).
I was using the first way, because is easier to split each project with your respectves programmers. But i had problem with spring security configurations.
Any other options?!?
Sorry about my english
Your question is very open and answers may be highly subjective. You're stating a very limited number of requirements, hence you can go either direction.
There is a lot to be said for compartmentalizing an application. There isn't many larger organizations around that haven't acknowledged the need to do so. Often that way is paved for people already, i.e. existing guidelines exist that specify the component boundaries. It helps with understanding (sub-)domains, having parallel projects in flight, and very importantly reuse.
That all doesn't mean much if you have no business or technical requirements prompting you to do so. Instead, as a developer, you may rather focus on being prepared for change (once new requirements arise). So, have (unit) tests in place, et cetera. Change should be easy.
Good day,
I will begin developing a Web API solution for a multi-company organization. I'm hoping to make available all useful data to any company across the organization.
Given that I expect there to be a lot of growth with this solution, I want to ensure that it's organized properly from the start.
I want to organize various services by company, and then again by application or function.
So, with regards to the URL, should I target a structure like:
/company1/application1/serviceOperation1
or is there some way to leverage namespaces:
/company2.billing/serviceOperation2
Is it possible to create a separate Web API project in my solution for each company? Is there any value in doing so?
Hope we're not getting too subjective, but the examples I have seen have a smaller scope, and I really see my solution eventually exposing a lot of Web API services.
Thanks,
Chris
Before writing a line of code I would be looking at how the information is to be secured and deployed, versioned and culture of the company.
Will the same security mechanisms (protocols, certificates, modes, etc.) be shared across all companies and divisions?
If they are shared then there is a case for keeping them in the same solution
Will the services cause differing amounts of load and be deployed onto multiple servers with different patching schedules?
If the services are going onto different servers then they should probably be split to match
Will the deployment and subsequent versioning schedule be independent for each service or are all services always deployed together?
If they are versioned independently then you would probably split the solution accordingly
How often does the company restructure and keep their applications?
If the company is constantly restructuring without you would probably want to split the services by application. If the company is somewhat stable and focused on changing the application capabilities then you would probably want to split the services by division function (accounts, legal, human resources, etc.)
As for the URL to access this should naturally flow from the answers above. Hope this helps.
I completed a new MVC web application and my boss asked me to create a new version for a new custumer. Same web application but differente CSS and two new modules (for module I mean a new page used by user to interact with DB). It's not a big deal and quite easy to do, just duplicate the project in my Eclipse and modify it. Two days work and project completed. Well done, all happy but not me.
I was thinking to wordpress, it's really customizable, just create a new template and plugin and activate it. I'd like to do somenthing similar to reduce the new version deploy and the code mainteneance. My question is, how can I do something similar with Spring? or better, is it possible to create a new module and deploy it for a web application? is the Spring dynamic the right option for a MVC Spring application?
thanks,
Andrea
I don't think your approach is correct. You need to discuss with your manager whether this situation is likely to repeat. Because to me it looks like it might.
Let's imagine a scenario: you have a number of copies of your app with some minor enhancements or changes between them. A month later one customer reports about a bug that's really nasty and has to be fixed in every of your app instances. Imagine your pain.
Why don't you approach it with multi-tenancy in mind?
Implement white-labelling, so that depending on the customer your application can get different looks;
Extend the backend, so that customers don't ever see each other's data
Implement configurable features, so that one customer doesn't see extended features that your boss sold to another customer. When he does sell them - it's going to be a matter of toggling a few flags in the database/configs.
Don't want to support multi-tenancy or the product is physically deployed on different (customer) servers? Doesn't matter! If you find a bug, you fix it once and redeploy the jar-file to all the affected systems.
Granted, the above isn't two days of work, but down the road this approach may save a lot more.
As to your question, Spring allows you to customize its looks via changeable styles and layouts. I suggest you to create a sample web app with Spring Roo to see how it's done. However, if I were you I would still aim to have a shared codebase between the projects at the very least.
I've been reading through a couple of questions on here and various articles on MVC and can see how it can even be applied to GUI event intensive applications like a paint app.
Can anyone cite a situation where MVC might be a bad thing and its use ill-advised?
EDIT: I'm specifically talking about GUI applications here!
I tried MVC in my network kernel driver. The patch was rejected.
I think you're looking at it kind of backwards. The point is not to see where you can apply a pattern like MVC, the point is to learn the patterns and recognize when the problem you are trying to solve can naturally be solved by applying the pattern. So if your problem space can be naturally divided into model, view and controller then it is a good candidate for MVC. If you can't easily see which parts of your design fall into the three categories, it may not be the appropriate pattern.
MVC makes sense for web applications.
In web applications, you process some data (on SA: writing questions, adding comments, changing user info), you have state (logged in user), you don't have many different pages, but a lot of different content to fit into those pages. One Question page vs. a million questions.
For making CMS, for example, MVC is useless. You don't have any models, no controllers, just a pages of text with decorations and menus. The problem is no longer processing data - the problem now is serving that text content properly.
Tho, CMS Admin would build on top of MVC just fine, it's just user part that wouldn't.
For web services, you'd better use REST which, I believe, is a distinct paradigm.
WebDAV application wouldn't benefit greatly from MVC, either.
The caveat on Ruby for Web programming is that Rails is better suited for building Web applications. I’ve seen many projects attempt to create a WebDAV server or a content management system CMS with Rails and fail miserably. While you can do a CMS in Rails, there are much more efficient technologies for the task, such as Drupal and Django. In fact, I’d say if you’re looking at a Java Portal development effort, you should evaluate Drupal and Django for the task instead.
Anything where you want to drop in 3rd party components will make it tough to work in the MVC pattern. A good example of this is a CMS.
Each component you get will have their "own" controller objects and you won't be able to share "control" of model -> ui passing.
I don't necessarily know that MVC is ever really a bad idea for a GUI app. But there are alternatives that are arguably better (and also arguably worse depending on whose opinion you're asking). The most common is MVP. See here for an explanation: Everything You Wanted To Know About MVC and MVP But Were Afraid To Ask.
Although I suppose it might be a bad idea to use MVC if you're using a framework or otherwise interacting with software that wasn't designed with MVC in mind.
In other words, it's a lot like comparing programming languages. There's usually not many tasks that one can say that one is better than the other for. It usually boils down to programmer preference, availability of libraries, and the team's experience.
MVC shouldn't be used in applications where performance is critical. I don't know if this still applys with the increase of computing power but one example is a call center application. If you can save .5 seconds per call entering and updating information those savings add up over time. To get the last bit of performance out of your app you should use a desktop app instead of a web app and have it talk directly to the database.
When is it a bad thing? Where ever there is another code-structure that would better fit your project.
There's countless projects where MVC wouldn't "fit", but I don't see how a list of them would be of any benefit..
If MVC fits, use it, if not, use something else..
MVC and ORM are a joke....they are only appropriate when your app is not a database app, or when you want to keep the app database agnostic. If you're using an RDBMS that supports stored procedures, then that's the only way to go. Stored procs are the preferred approach for experienced application developers. MVC and ORM are only promoted by companies trying to sell products or services related to those technologies (e.g. Microsoft trying to sell VS). Stop wasting your time learning Java and C#, focus instead on what really matters, Javascript and SQL.