TopLink - Best Practice Question - Object Validation

We are fairly new to TopLink and have a question about doing object validation. We would like perform some validation on our objects that are about to be persisted to the DB. Since TopLink will persist all objects that are reachable from the ojects that are registered (I think) we would like to send a message to each of these objects (validate) before they are persisted. If the object validation fails, we will throw an exception (and the objects will not be persisted), hopefully such that the exception can be received by the client. Has anybody done anything similar to this before, or is there a better way of approaching this?
TIA for any help.

Are you using EJBs?
If so, there are a couple of options that may work better for you.
1. You could use the ejbStore method for your validation and throw the exception in there. You should be able to get the exception on the client side, but it may be wrapped in several layers.
2. For more complex validation, you may want to use a session bean to control the validation process. It can interact with your entity beans and provide feedback about why validation fails.

Similar Messages

Best Practices Question: How to send error message to SSHR web page.

Best Practices Question: How to send error message to SSHR web page from custom PL\SQL procedure called by SSHR workflow.
For the Manager Self-Service application we’ve copied various workflows which were modified to meet business needs. Part of this exercise was creating custom PL\SQL Package Procedures that would gather details on the WF using them on custom notification sent by the WF.
What I’m looking for is if/when the PL\SQL procedure errors, how does one send an failure message back and display it on the SS Page?
Writing information into a log or table at the database level works for trouble-shooting, but we’re looking for something that will provide the end-user with an intelligent message that the workflow has failed.
Thanks ahead of time for your responses.
Rich

We have implemented the same kind of requirement long back.
We have defined our PL/SQL procedures with two OUT parameters
1) Result Type (S:Success, E:Error)
2) Result Message
In the PL/SQL procedure we always use below construct when we want to raise any message
hr_utility.set_message(APPL_NO, 'FND_MESSAGE_NAME');
hr_utility.raise_error;
In Exception block we write below( in successful case we just set the p_result_flag := 'S';)
EXCEPTION
WHEN APP_EXCEPTION.APPLICATION_EXCEPTION THEN
p_result_flag := 'E';
p_result_message := hr_utility.get_message;
WHEN OTHERS THEN
p_result_flag := 'E';
p_result_message := hr_utility.get_message;
fnd_message.set_name('PER','FFU10_GENERAL_ORACLE_ERROR');
fnd_message.set_token('2',substr(sqlerrm,1,200));
fnd_msg_pub.add;
p_result_message := fnd_msg_pub.get_detail;
After executing the PL/SQL in java
We have written some thing similar to
orclStmt.execute();
OAExceptionUtils.checkErrors (txn);
String resultFlag = orclStmt.getString(provide the resultflag bind no);
if ("E".equalsIgnoreCase(resultFlag)){
String resultMessage = orclStmt.getString(provide the resultMessage bind no);
orclStmt.close();
throw new OAException(resultMessage, OAException.ERROR);
It safely shows the message to the user with all the data in the page.
We have been using this construct for a long time for all our projects. They are all working as expected.
Regards,
Peddi.

Best practice question -- copy container, assemble it, build execution plan

So, this is a design / best practice question:
I usually copy containers as instructed by docs
I then set the source system parameters
I then generate needed parameters / assemble the copied container for ALL subject areas present in the container
I then build an execution plan JUST FOR THE 4 SUBJECT AREAS and build the execution plan and set whatever is needed before running it.
QUESTION - When i copy the container, should i delete all not needed subject areas out of it or is it best to do this when building the execution plan? I am basically trying to simplify the container for my own sake and have the container just have few subject areas rather than wait till i build the execution plan and then focus on few subject areas.
Your thoughts / clarifications are appreciated.
Regards,

Hi,
I would suggest that you leave the subject areas and then just don't include them in the execution plan. Otherwise you have the possibility of running into the situation where you need to include another subject area in the future and you will have to go through the hassle of recreating it in your SSC.
Regards,
Matt

SAP Adapter Best Practice Question for Deployment to Clustered Environment

I have a best practices question on the iway Adapters around deployment into a clustered environment.
According to the documentation, you are supposed to run the installer on both nodes in the cluster but configure on just the first node. See below:
Install Oracle Application Adapters 11g Release 1 (11.1.1.3.0) on both machines.
Configure a J2CA configuration as a database repository on the first machine.
Perform the required changes to the ra.xml and weblogic-ra.xml files before deployment.
This makes sense to me because once you deploy the adapter rar in the next step it the appropriate rar will get staged and deployed on both nodes in the cluster.
What is the best practice for the 3rdParty adapter directory on the second node? The installer lays it down with the adapter rar and all. Since we only configure the adapter on node 1, the directory on node 2 will remain with the default installation files/values not the configured ones. Is it best practice to copy node 1's 3rdParty directory to node 2 once configured? If we leave node 2 with the default files/values, I suspect this will lead to confusion to someone later on who is troubleshooting because it will appear it was never configured correctly.
What do folks typically do in this situation? Obviously everything works to leave it as is, but it seems strange to have the two nodes differ.

What is the version of operating system. If you are any OS version lower than Windows 2012 then you need to add one more voter for quorum.
Balmukund Lakhani
Please mark solved if I've answered your question, vote for it as helpful to help other users find a solution quicker
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
My Blog |
Team Blog | @Twitter
| Facebook
Author: SQL Server 2012 AlwaysOn -
Paperback, Kindle

SAP Adapter Best Practice Question for Migration of Channels

I have a best practice question on the SAP adapter when migrating an OSB project from one environment (DEV) to another (QA).
If my project includes an adapter channel that (e.g., Inbound SAP Proxy listening on a channel), how do I migrate that project to another environment if the channel in the target environment is different.
I tried using the search and replace mechanism in the sbconsole, but it doesn't find the channel name in the jca and wsdl files.
What is the recommended way to migrate from one environment to the other when the channel name changes?

I have a best practice question on the SAP adapter when migrating an OSB project from one environment (DEV) to another (QA).
If my project includes an adapter channel that (e.g., Inbound SAP Proxy listening on a channel), how do I migrate that project to another environment if the channel in the target environment is different.
I tried using the search and replace mechanism in the sbconsole, but it doesn't find the channel name in the jca and wsdl files.
What is the recommended way to migrate from one environment to the other when the channel name changes?

Best Practice question - null or empty object?

Given a collection of objects where each object in the collection is an aggregation, is it better to leave references in the object as null or to instantiate an empty object? Now I'll clarify this a bit more.....
I have an object, MyCollection, that extends Collection and implements Serializable(work requirement). MyCollection is sent as a return from an EJB search method. The search method looks up data in a database and creates MyItem objects for each row in the database. If there are 10 rows, MyCollection would contain 10 MyItem objects (references, of course).
MyItem has three attributes:
public class MyItem implements Serializable {
    String name;
    String description;
    MyItemDetail detail;
}When creating MyItem, let's say that this item didn't have any details so there is no reason to create MyitemDetail. Is it better to leave detail as a null reference or should a MyItemdetail object be created? I know this sounds like a specific app requirement, but I'm looking for a best practice - what most people do in this case. There are reasons for both approaches. Obviously, a bunch of empty objects going over RMI is a strain on resources whereas a bunch of null references is not. But on the receiving end, you have to account for the MyItemDetail reference to be null or not - is this a hassle or not?
I looked for this at [url http://www.javapractices.com]Java Practices but found nothing.

I know this sounds like a specific apprequirement,
, but I'm looking for a best practice - what most
people do in this case. It depends but in general I use null.Stupid.Thanks for that insightful comment.
>
I do a lot of database work though. And for that
null means something specific.Sure, return null if you have a context where null
means something. Like for example that you got no
result at all. But as I said before its's best to
keep the nulls at the perimeter of your design. Don't
let nulls slip through.As I said, I do a lot of database work. And it does mean something specific. Thus (in conclusion) that means that, in "general", I use null most of the time.
Exactly what part of that didn't you follow?
And exactly what sort of value do you use for a Date when it is undefined? What non-null value do you use such that your users do not have to write exactly the same code that they would to check for null anyways?

Best Practice Question - Business Logic in Value Objects?

Just wondering what people's thoughts on best practices for setting properties of Value Objects.
For instance, I have several getter/setters in one of my Value Objects with logic in the setter that uses the value to set values of other properties.
For example, I have a Value Object that has the following properties:
category (of type Category, which is another Value Object with properties "name" and "id")
categoryId (of type int)
categoryUpdated (of type Boolean)
I have a collection of Category Objects in the Model. When I set the categoryId of this class, I set the "categoryUpdated" to true, and dispatch an CairngormEvent to that find the "category" with the specified "categoryId" and set the "category" property to this item.
So what is the best practice? To simply make the "categoryId" a public variable, and create a new Event/Command to perform all this logic? Or is it ok to do it all in the Value Object setter?
Thanks.

Hi Eric,
I can't speak for best practices, but the only logic I've ever added to a VO were getters: an example was a set of getters on an airline flight VO to get overall flight departure/arrival times/cities from an array of flight segments in a property of the VO.
I feel uneasy (in the nicest possible way) about your VO for two reasons: firstly it has a strong dependency on bits of the Cairngorm framework to look up the category (and VOs normally don't need to depend on anything), and secondly the intent of Commands in Cairngorm is more to represent user gestures than to wire up VO properties (I often see people shoehorning stuff into Commands that might be better of as plain old business utility classes). I would rather see an UpdateCategoryCommand (that's what the user is trying to do?) that updates categoryId and hits a delegate to populate the category property.
That said you might have a very good reason for doing this. Could you tell us where the code is that's setting categoryId, and if anything is using categoryUpdated?
Cheers,
Robin

Best Practice Question

I have 3 Areas for my DWH
The first area is Staging then validation and core
Staging is just do load date from the source systems
validation is to validate data (every city has to have a countrie ....)
core is my DWH shema.
The First step in ETL is to load the data from core to validation, let's say my GEO_DIM Dimension goes to Countries, Cities and Regions in core. Additionaly I build a CRC SUM when I downlaod from Core to Validation and store the CRC Checksum in a Staging table.
The second step is to load target from the source systems to staging, but only those date that are non equal to the previous downloadet CRC schecksum, so only changed or new data going to staging.
The third step is do load that new/changed data from staging to core and proof some dependences. It's just validation.
My Question is, what is the best practic to bring three tables (Countries, cities and region) to one Dimension
thanks and regards
Andreas

Andreas,
I guess the correct is depends... Without kidding, are you planning to use a flat star table for this dimension? If that is the case you would be joining the sources together and loading this into the table.
Now this sounds way to simple, so I guess there is something more to the question...
Jean-Pierre

Informatica and Essbase Best Practice questions

We now have the Informatica adapter for Essbase installed and working. We have been able to get Informatica to upload data successfully. Now I have a few questions that I have not been able to find answers to in any documentation or forums for Informatica or Essbase. I have submitted these same questions to the Informatica Support but thought I would also post the questions here to see if many folks are using Informatica against Essbase.
We are using:
Informatica 8.6.1 (Linux)
Essbase 11.1.1.3 (Windows 2003)
1) I can see in Informtica that when we load data to Essbase (Target) it gives me the option to run a calc script AFTER it loads the data. However, if I need to run a Calc script BEFORE the load to Essbase (Target) what is the best practice? The work around I have found was to add the same session twice and for the 1st instance select the option to 'ONLY RUN THE CALC SCRIPT' on the mapping tab. The problem with this is the log shows that it will still run the query against the Source tables. This will impact run times and double to querying against the Source database. What is the Best Practice and proper way to build the workflow to Run a Calc Script BEFORE the load?
2)Since you do not see the list of Calc Scripts for Essbase in Informatica (you have to manually type the Calc name), If I want to run the 'Default' calc for Essbase what is the syntax to run the 'Default' Calc Script? Tried 'Default' but didn't seem to work.
3)I have other tasks in Essbase I want to do before actually having Informatica load the data. I would like to run the MAXL commands via a Command task. What is the Best Practice for doing this and the syntax to run MAXL commands in a Command Task in Informatica? I previously had Shell scripts built on the Informatica server that would be kicked off within Informatica, but we are trying to move away from shell scripts and instead have the scripting codes IN the workflows/sessions to make it easier to review the code and follow the logic, rather than having to find the scripts and open each of them.
Any assistance you have with the two products working together I would GREATLY appreciate it!
Robert

AS i know addUser(User user){ ... } is much more useful for several reasons:
1.Its object oriented
2.its easy to write , because if Object has many parameters its very painful to write method with comma seperated parameters

Best Practices: Question about Passing DataSet to Crystal through C#

I have used the tutorial provided by Business Objects and have successfully passed a dataset from C# code to Crystal Reports.
I have a few questions about "best pratices" though.
It appears that when passing the dataset to crystal then you no longer have the ability to put SQL Expressions in the report anymore otherwise errors will occur.
So, I'm trying to come up with a way to have a custom field in the SELECT statement and have it show up on the report as a field. So, in the below example I created a custom SQL field called TIMES7 in the query.
"Select CLM_ID, CLM, PAID_111X, *(PAID111X * 7) As TIMES7*_ From WIKI.MULCRICKET WHERE CLM_ID < 5"
If I create a formula field in Crystal and set it's value to {MULCRICKET .TIMES7} then it works like a hybrid SQL Expression at run-time.
This does work but has issues because the database field doesn't really exist in the design environment which causes error when the formula is saved. But it does work at run-time.
I was wondering if their was a best practice for this?

So why are you using a formula that doesn't work? If it errors in the designer it's telling you it's not supported.
Drop the formula into a filed and hide it if you don't want it displayed, this way it gets into the record selection formula.
"Best Practices" is don't use formulae that won't verify in the Designer. "If it doesn't work in the designer it won't work in code"
If you need to add an "unknown" field at run time then use RAS to insert the field.

Best practice - caching objects

What is the best practice when many transactions requires a persistent
object that does not change?
For example, in a ASP model supporting many organizations, organization is
required for many persistent objects in the model. I would rather look the
organization object up once and keep it around.
It is my understanding that once the persistence manager is closed the
organization can no longer be part of new transactions with other
persistence managers. Aside from looking it up for every transaction, is
there a better solution?
Thanks in advance
Gary

problem with using object id fields instead of PC object references in your
object model is that it makes your object model less useful and intuitive.
Taking to the extreme (replacing all object references with their IDs) you
will end up with object like a row in JDBC dataset. Plus if you use PM per
HTTP request it will not do you any good since organization data won't be in
PM anyway so it might even be slower (no optimization such as Kodo batch
loads)
So we do not do it.
What you can do:
1. Do nothing special just use JVM level or distributed cache provided by
Kodo. You will not need to access database to get your organization data but
object creation cost in each PM is still there (do not forget this cache we
are talking about is state cache not PC object cache) - good because
transparent
2. Designate a single application wide PM for all your read-only big
things - lookup screens etc. Use PM per request for the rest. Not
transparent - affects your application design
3. If large portion of your system is read-only use is PM pooling. We did it
pretty successfully. The requirement is to be able to recognize all PCs
which are updateable and evict/makeTransient those when PM is returned to
the pool (Kodo has a nice extension in PersistenceManagerImpl for removing
all managed object of a certain class) so you do not have stale data in your
PM. You can use Apache Commons Pool to do the pooling and make sure your PM
is able to shrink. It is transparent and increase performance considerably
One approach we use
"Gary" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
What is the best practice when many transactions requires a persistent
object that does not change?
For example, in a ASP model supporting many organizations, organization is
required for many persistent objects in the model. I would rather look the
organization object up once and keep it around.
It is my understanding that once the persistence manager is closed the
organization can no longer be part of new transactions with other
persistence managers. Aside from looking it up for every transaction, is
there a better solution?
Thanks in advance
Gary

Best Practice Question: Portal Sync Rules

Hi,
Is there any benefit in combining Inbound and Outbound Flows in a single Sync Rule?
Or does it not matter if Inbound flows have their own Sync Rule and Outbound flows have their own Sync Rules?
Does either option generate more/less EREs/DREs?
Is either option better for performance reasons?
look forward to your comments, thank you
sk

1:
Only the OSR's create EREs, so if you have 4 outbound 3 inbound (assuming a user gets all 4 outbound SR's) the user should have 4 EREs. If the rules were combined into 3 outbound/inbound and 1 outbound, the user still gets 4 EREs.
2:
If my source was AD, I would create a new MV attribute called inAD. Then import a constant "true" from the target, AD for example. Then from my source, HR for example, ill flow in a constant "false". Lastly update the MV attribute precedence for the
inAD attribute to be AD then HR. From there i'd create a custom attribute in the portal so I can use the flag for set criteria.
This might be a long winded way of getting it done, but say you have 10k users in AD and used DRE's. It means 10k more objects in the MV and in the portal.
Disclaimer: Not saying this is best practice, it's just what I do :)

Best practice question for Bounded task flows

We are new to Jdeveloper/ADF and I was wondering if we should always try to use a bounded task flow for our applications... is this considered the best way to develop an app? even the small single page ones?
Thanks in advance.

Hi,
let me turn teh question around: How many tools do you have at home beside of a hammer ? In other words, its the problem you need to solve (and use cases are problems) that should determine the use of bounded task flows and its granularity. Note that for each use case the bounded task flow makes a good candidate for delivering it. Doesn't mean that every single page needs to go into its own task flow. For general bounded best practices have a look here
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/developer-tools/jdev/adf-task-flow-design-132904.pdf
Frank

Bean best practice question

Simple questions (hopefully), I know how to code this but just want some advice on the best way to do the following:
1. User enters data into HTML form and submits
2. Some Java at the backend grabs these details and emails them off somewhere
I am thinking of doing the following, but whats the best way?
1. HTML form submits and data is sent directly to a JavaBean (FormBean.java)
2. FormBean.java contains standard getters/setters but also contains a method called sendMail(), is this bad practice? Do I need a second Bean sendMail.java? Or is this completely the wrong way to do things i.e. should I do this entirely in a servlet with only 1 bean to grab the data (FormBean) and then access from servlet?
Just a bit confused on whats best practice for this stuff?
Thanks!

2. FormBean.java contains standard getters/setters but also contains a method called sendMail(), is this bad practice? Do I need a second Bean sendMail.java? A better approach is this way
a) Have all the form data in the form bean
b) Write sendMail in a all together different class, as action.
c) Send the form bean as a parameter to sendMail for processing and sending an email
This way your sendMail() will become a kind of a service. Tomorrow you might have some other data, which you will have to send it in an email. In that case, you just reuse sendMail() method. Otherwise, if you have sendMail() in form bean itself, then if there are many form beans, then you would have to write sendMail() in every form bean, which is a bad practice. One principle of OOAD is to separate the functionality, which is redundant in your classes and make it as a separate module. If there are changes to the sendMail() functionality then, by having it in one module, you only have to change it at one place.
Or is this completely the wrong way to do things i.e. should I do this entirely in a servlet with only 1 bean to grab the data (FormBean) and then access from servlet?You can have a servlet which acts like a controller, which receives the request parameters, constructs the form bean and invokes appropriate Action (in your case sendMail()). This is same as an MVC framework. Instead of you re-inventing the wheel to create a servlet controller, form bean, action etc. You could use one of the several MVC frameworks available in the market, such as Struts or Spring MVC.

Design Pattern / Best Practice Question

Hi,
I have been using Flex for a while now, but there is a
scenario which I still have not found a solution I'm entirely happy
with. I'm wondering if anyone else out there might have suggestions
on a design pattern or best practice.
Suppose I have a view which depends on model data which
resides in some back end systems. That model data may or may not
have been loaded (e.g. via a web service or remote object call) at
the time the view is displayed.
I don't know if the user will ever visit this part of the
application so I would prefer to defer retrieval of the data until
the user actually navigates to this view. Or I want to retrieve the
data each time the view is displayed because the data is dynamic
and could change between one presentation of the view and the next.
Because the data comes from several systems, I cannot simply
make one service call and display the view when it completes and
all the data is available. I need to call several services which
could complete in any order but I only want to display my view
after I know all of them have completed and all of the model data
is available. Otherwise, I can present the user an incomplete view
(e.g. some combo boxes are empty until the corresponding service
call to get the data completes).
The solution I like best so far is to dispatch a single event
(I am using Cairngorm) handled by a single command which acts as
the caller and responder for all of the services. This command then
remembers which responses it has received and dispatches another
event to navigate to the view once all the results have returned.
If the services being called are used in different
combinations on different screens, this results in proliferation of
events and commands. An event and command for each service and
additional events and commands to bundle the services and the
handling of their responses in the right combinations for each of
the views.
Another approach is to have some helper class listen for all
of the model changes and only display the view when the model
enters some state that is acceptable. It is sometimes difficult to
determine just by looking at the model whether it is in the right
state (e.g. how can I tell that a collection is the new collection
that should just have been requested versus an old one lingering
from a previous call). The logic required can get kind of
convoluted and brittle.
Basically, all of the solutions I've come up with so far seem
less than ideal and a little hackish. I keep thinking there is some
elegant solution out there that I am just missing ... but so far,
no luck finding it. Thoughts?
Thanks.
Bill

i think a service class is right - to coordinate your calls.
i would have 1 event per call (so you could listen to individual
responses if you wanted to).
then i would use a flag. if you want to check for staleness,
you would probably want two objects to map your service flag to
lastRequested and lastCompleted. when you check, check if it's
completed, and if it's not stale and that your lastRequested is
less than lastCompleted (meaning that you're not currently waiting,
i.e. you've returned since making a request). then make the request
and update your lastRequested.
here's a snippet of what i mean.
./paul
public static const SVC1_LOADED:int = 1;
public static const SVC2_LOADED:int = 2;
public static const SVC3_LOADED:int = 4;
public static const SVCALL_LOADED:int = 7;
private var completedFlag:int = 0;
then each call would have it's own callback.
private function onSvc1Complete( evt:Event):void {
completedFlag |= SVC1_LOADED;
lastCompleted[ SVC1_LOADED ] = getTimer();
dispatchEvent( new Event("svc1complete") );
checkDone();
private function checkDone():void{
if( completedFlag == SVCALL_LOADED )
dispatchEvent(new Event( "allLoaded" ));

TopLink - Best Practice Question - Object Validation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for