Combining realm and sql-lite in a single application.
I'm trying to integrate two application of which one is in realm and another is in sqlite. Is it possible to do this
There is no real reason to combine a nosql and sql based database. Realm already outclassed sqlite in terms in fluent api, database queries and easy of use.To answer your question, it can be done,sqlite access are independent of realm, there is no collision because they create two separate yet unique files. A side note, maintaining two database instances on a phone can be taxing, and management will inevitably become a problem, this will also introduce security errors of course.So yea you can do it,but do not, unless your a great database administrator or something.
I am using JPA and WildFly 10.
Imagine that two different companies each have subscriptions to use my application. Ideally, I'd like to split up the data of the two companies into separate databases, or at the very least, separately prefixed tables, using JPA. If a user logs in on http://example.com/company1/, it will seem as though the application is completely separate from the application running at http://example.com/company2/, when in actuality, the "two" applications are part of one application.
Multiple users may be logged in at the same time from different companies, so the database being used should be session based.
The main reason for splitting up the data into separate tables or databases is for better organization. The reason for using one application rather than multiple is to allow for horizontal scaling.
I have seen answers which state to create multiple persistence.xml files, however my application should dynamically create and drop the databases or tables based on the current subscriptions that are active. Think of it like a web hosting company, where as soon as you pay, you can login and begin working on your website; that's the direction I am moving in. Therefore, I cannot hard-code the different companies into the program.
How can this be done with JPA? Is it even possible? Or is there a better way to accomplish what I am seeking?
You are trying to make your application multi tenant capable. One way I know is:
use a field in every database table which contains a predefined value for a tenant.
set current tenant when the request comes from this tenant
then use Hibernate filtering capability to filter tenant-specific data automatically. Once the filter is activated every query will return only data specific to the current tenant.
Note: a Hibernate filter is set on the Hibernate Session object. If you are using pure JPA, the Entity Manager interface has a method called getDelegate() which returns a Hibernate session object.
Here is a link to the information about Hibernate filters. There are also tutorials on how to use them on the Internet.
I am developing spring mvc application
For now I am using innodb mysql but I have to develop the application to support other databases also.
Can any one please suggest me how to handle concurrent sql update on single record.
Suppose two users are trying to update same record then how to handle such scenario.
Note: My database structure is dependent on some configuration (It can change at runtime) and my spring controller is singleton in nature.
Thanks.
Update:
Just for reference I am going to implement version like https://stackoverflow.com/a/3618445/3898076).
Transactions are the way to go when it comes to concurrent sql updates, in spring you can use a transaction manager.
As for the database structure, as far as I know MySql does not support transactions for DDL commands, that is if you change the structure concurrently with updating, you're likely to run into problems.
To handle multiple users working on the same data, you need to implement a manual "lock" or "version" field on the table to keep track of last updates.
Im currently working my way towards JPA 2.0 and I start of liking how easy it is to maintain persistent data.
What I'm currently trying to accomplish is using JPA in a basic desktop application. The application should allow me to open embedded databases which are on my file system. I chose H2 databases for now, but I can really live switching to JavaDB or anything else.
What Im trying to accomplish is, that one can open the database file without previously define a persistence-unit in the persistence.xml file.
I can easily define a unit and persist objects, but it needs to be configured first.
I want to write some sort of database browser which allows opening without preconfiguration and recompiling.
http://www.objectdb.com/java/jpa/start/connection
I saw that ObjectDB allows access for this type of PersistenceFactory creation, but I was not able to transfer this example to other databases.
Am I totally wrong with the way I approach this probblem? Is JPA not designed with on-the-fly database access?
Thank you for your help,
Johannes
Not part of the JPA standard. Some implementations may offer their own API to do it. For example with DataNucleus if you go to this page http://www.datanucleus.org/products/accessplatform_3_0/jpa/persistence_unit.html at the end you can create dynamic persistence-units (and hence EMFs), and that implementation obviously allows persistence to the widest range of datastores you'll get anywhere
You can pass a Map of properties to createEntityManagerFactory() call that defines the database connection info, etc. The property names are the same as in the persistence.xml. I assume most JPA providers support this, EclipseLink does.
You will still need to define the set of classes for the database and map them.
If you do not have any classes either, than you could look into EclipseLink's dynamic support,
http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Examples/JPA/Dynamic
If you want to make a database browser accessing different databases, you can't use a PU/Entity Manager (imo).
You'll need a dialogue asking a user for the IP/Port of the database, the username/password, the database name to access, and the type of database.
Then all you need to do is create a socket, send requests over the socket, and parse the response into a view.
Since both the request and the response are database specific, the user has to select the proper database driver.
I am not very familiar with databases and what they offer outside of the CRUD operations.
My research has led me to triggers. Basically it looks like triggers offer this type of functionality:
(from Wikipedia)
There are typically three triggering events that cause triggers to "fire":
INSERT event (as a new record is being inserted into the database).
UPDATE event (as a record is being changed).
DELETE event (as a record is being deleted).
My question is: is there some way I can be notified in Java (preferably including the data that changed) by the database when a record is Updated/Deleted/Inserted using some sort of trigger semantics?
What might be some alternate solutions to this problem? How can I listen to database events?
The main reason I want to do this is a scenario like this:
I have 5 client applications all in different processes/existing across different PCs. They all share a common database (Postgres in this case).
Lets say one client changes a record in the DB that all 5 of the clients are "interested" in. I am trying to think of ways for the clients to be "notified" of the change (preferably with the affected data attached) instead of them querying for the data at some interval.
Using Oracle you can setup a Trigger on a table and then have the trigger send a JMS message. Oracle has two different JMS implementations. You can then have a process that will 'listen' for the message using the JDBC Driver. I have used this method to push changes out to my application vs. polling.
If you are using a Java database (H2) you have additional options. In my current application (SIEM) I have triggers in H2 that publish change events using JMX.
Don't mix up the database (which contains the data), and events on that data.
Triggers are one way, but normally you will have a persistence layer in your application. This layer can choose to fire off events when certain things happen - say to a JMS topic.
Triggers are a last ditch thing, as you're operating on relational items then, rather than "events" on the data. (For example, an "update", could in reality map to a "company changed legal name" event) If you rely on the db, you'll have to map the inserts & updates back to real life events.... which you already knew about!
You can then layer other stuff on top of these notifications - like event stream processing - to find events that others are interested in.
James
Hmm. So you're using PostgreSQL and you want to "listen" for events and be "notified" when they occur?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/sql-listen.html
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/sql-notify.html
Hope this helps!
Calling external processes from the database is very vendor specific.
Just off the top of my head:
SQLServer can call CLR programs from
triggers,
postgresql can call arbitrary C
functions loaded dynamically,
MySQL can call arbitrary C functions,
but they must be compiled in,
Sybase can make system calls if set
up to do so.
The simplest thing to do is to have the insert/update/delete triggers make an entry in some log table, and have your java program monitor that table. Good columns to have in your log table would be things like EVENT_CODE, LOG_DATETIME, and LOG_MSG.
Unless you require very high performance or need to handle 100Ks of records, that is probably sufficient.
I think you're confusing two things. They are both highly db vendor specific.
The first I shall call "triggers". I am sure there is at least one DB vendor who thinks triggers are different than this, but bear with me. A trigger is a server-side piece of code that can be attached to table. For instance, you could run a PSQL stored procedure on every update in table X. Some databases allow you to write these in real programming languages, others only in their variant of SQL. Triggers are typically reasonably fast and scalable.
The other I shall call "events". These are triggers that fire in the database that allow you to define an event handler in your client program. IE, any time there are updates to the clients database, fire updateClientsList in your program. For instance, using python and firebird see http://www.firebirdsql.org/devel/python/docs/3.3.0/beyond-python-db-api.html#database-event-notification
I believe the previous suggestion to use a monitor is an equivalent way to implement this using some other database. Maybe oracle? MSSQL Notification services, mentioned in another answer is another implementation of this as well.
I would go so far as to say you'd better REALLY know why you want the database to notify your client program, otherwise you should stick with server side triggers.
What you're asking completely depends on both the database you're using and the framework you're using to communicate with your database.
If you're using something like Hibernate as your persistence layer, it has a set of listeners and interceptors that you can use to monitor records going in and out of the database.
There are a few different techniques here depending on the database you're using. One idea is to poll the database (which I'm sure you're trying to avoid). Basically you could check for changes every so often.
Another solution (if you're using SQL Server 2005) is to use Notification Services, although this techonology is supposedly being replaced in SQL 2008 (we haven't seen a pure replacement yet, but Microsoft has talked about it publicly).
This is usually what the standard client/server application is for. If all inserts/updates/deletes go through the server application, which then modifies the database, then client applications can find out much easier what changes were made.
If you are using postgresql it has capability to listen notifications from JDBC client.
I would suggest using a timestamp column, last updated, together with possibly the user updating the record, and then let the clients check their local record timestamp against that of the persisted record.
The added complexity of adding a callback/trigger functionality is just not worth it in my opinion, unless supported by the database backend and the client library used, like for instance the notification services offered for SQL Server 2005 used together with ADO.NET.