I am trying to use the Configure class in CakePHP, but I'm not sure if I am using it correctly. I have read through the cook book and the API, but I can't seem to do what I want.
I have created a configuration file: app/config/config.php. I can directly edit this file and set variables in there and access them using Configure::read().
Is it possible to update the values of the configuration file from the application itself, i.e., from a controller? I have tried using Configure::write(), but this does not seem to change the value.
app/config/config.php isn't a file that's automatically loaded by Cake. Either move these variables into app/config/bootstrap.php or tell your bootstrap.php file to load your custom file. You could also put your variables in app/config/core.php, but I'd recommend against that. I tend to like leaving that file alone and adding/overwriting values in bootstrap.php.
According to the API, Configure is supposed to be used "for managing runtime configuration information".
You can use its methods to create, read, update and delete (CRUD) configuration variables at runtime. The Configure class is available everywhere in your CakePHP application and therefore CRUD operations performed on its data in any place, including a controller.
If you are looking for persistent storage, you could consider a database (SQL or NoSQL). I would not recommend using a text file, as it raises a lot of security concerns. Even if security is not an issue, a database is propably a more fitting solution.
More on the Configure class in the Cookbook.
Related
I am trying to represent environment variables in the Salesforce codebase and came across Custom Metadata Types. So based on which Sandbox I am in, I want to vary the baseURL of an external service that I am hitting from my apex class. I want to avoid hard coding anything in the class, and hence trying to find out an environment variable like solution.
How would you represent the URL as a custom metadata type? Also, how can I access it in the class? What happens when a qa sandbox is refreshed from prod? Do they custom metadata type records get overridden?
How are you calling that external service? If it's truly a base url you might be better of using "named credential" for it. It'll abstract the base url away for you, include authentication or certificate if you have to present any...
Failing that - custom metadata might be a poor choice. They're kind of dictionary objects, you can add more (but not from apex) but if you deploy stuff using Git/Ant/SFDX CLI rather than changesets it'd become bit pain, you'd need different custom metadata value for sandbox vs prod. Kinda defeats the purpose.
You might be better off using custom setting instead (hierarchy is enabled by default, list you'd have to flip a checkbox in setup. List is useful if you need key-value kind of pairs, similar to custom metadata): https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/74049/what-is-the-difference-between-custom-settings-and-custom-metadata-types
And you can modify them with Apex too. Which means that in ideal world you could have a "postcopy" class running as soon as sandbox is refreshed that overwrites the custom setting with the non-prod value. For named credential I don't think you can pull it off, you'd need a mini deployment that changes it or manual step (have you seen https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/q/955/799 ?)
I'd like to manage a bunch of report files directly on a file system directly for easier use, especially when updating or excanging them with newer versions. And to avoid this intransparent document library.
Now i want to read one of these Files directly in liferay to pass them to JasperReports in general (e.g. as a ByteStream). I coudln't find any way to do this or something that discribes any way to handly files.
How is this possible to achieve?
Or do i completely mess around with my idea?
You basically can leverage the powers of the Spring framework, since Liferay makes use of Spring more or less directly.
You need to use some sort of "resource adapter" to open files, which you can do in many ways. It pretty much depends where you put files and how they get there (if provided from outside or generated by a Liferay portlet itself, or provided as deployed resource).
I can recommend searching for the following Spring class to be used:
org.springframework.core.io.FileSystemResource
Nevertheless you should think about storing these files in the database, as this is much safer after all (transaction safety, security, ...).
Background
I have to migrte a existing javascript application (one page app) to extjs. The display and behavior of the application depends on the users permission.
Current design
The application is divided into plugins, which represent a feature set to which permissions are granted. Each of those plugins consists of a single javascript file. A user can have permissions for one or more plugins. Depending on the permissions, those files are loaded in the head of the page. Each of these plugins will add its entries to the main menu and expose the methods used to drive the application.
The permissions are stored in a mysql database.
ExtJs's default design
In ExtJs the source files contain each a class. During the build process, all .js files are concatenated to yield one big .js file, that contains everything.
What would be the best design approach?
I considered to use custom compilation with sencha cmd, and create that way a .js file for each plugin. Then I could load these plugins the same way I do it now. But this results in a complicated build and deployment process.
I also thought about creating one and only .js file with a standard Ext build process. I would then load the permissions from the server via ajax in order to construct the menu. All the objects and methods would exist, but only those are accessible where the user has permissions.
In my opinion, the second approach is much easier maintainable, but it seens to have a security problem, because everyone could look at the source and find out about the data interfaces exposed on the server and consumed by ajax.
Any comments, ideas or advices are welcome. Thanks !
Number two would be the way to go. If you keep your server side permissions in check (while updating data etc) you only need ExtJS to show/hide menu items based on permissions. That way, malicious users can turn certain plugins/items on or off, but they can never execute something that requires more permissions then they would normally have.
I have read a lot of statements like "you shouldn't clog your app.config file with custom settings". However, I was under the impression that this was exactly the purpose of the file?
Is it just indeed a preference thing? Or are there any real benefits (other than separation of settings) by using a custom XML file, as apposed to the app.config file? If you need to explicitly separate settings would it better to use a custom ConfigurationSection rather than opting for a custom XML file?
I would like to here other peoples thoughts on this.
Some people tend to go a bit overboard on custom config section handlers, in my humble opinion.
I tend to use them only when I need something that is very structed; and that is used/written by 3rd parties (i.e. I want to do some extravagent validation on it).
I think you can quite happily use app.config/web.config for all relevant settings, and use separate XML files when it is very clear that is a separate component of the app.
Have a look at the Application Settings Architecture, the app.config is for Configration regarding the Application, thats quite a general term though.. So I would suggest you look into the Application Settings Files.
I would not store settings like "load database on startup or not" in the app.config. I would rather use an Alternative Storage like Application Settings for this, don't confuse Application Configuration with Settings, even though you might want to do that, Don't. app.config is supposed to have configration regarding lower level things like Database connection, Membership Provider or any other Application Critic information.
Most settings tend to fall into one of three camps:
Technical settings that affect the internal behaviour of the code, e.g. database connection string, data file path, logging switches, error handling switches, etc.
Business settings that affect the business logic of the product, e.g. "are users allowed to access the CRM Module?"
User-specific profile values, e.g. "is this user allowed to access the CRM Module?".
The natural place for type 1 is in app.config or web.config, and the natural place for types 2 and 3 is in the database.
App.Config are good for configuration that are application specific : path to database is a good example. The rest should be out of it.
One thing you might want to do is to create user-specific files, you can then use custom xml that will be saved into an IsolatedStore.
In my opinion I consider app.config to be good for deployment-time settings such as the location of the database, or an IP address or location of critical data file, etc. User settings like font, color, behavior preferences should go in a different file which you can easily create and save with Xml serialization.
In my WinForms app, I have a few textboxes that the user typed some data into. I want to store the data, but I don't want to use a database. In my stone-age C++ days, I'd just use a .ini. Somehow, app.config doesn't seem like the right place to store this data, though.
What are my other options?
I would say the .config file is the right place. Just be sure to use the User scoped area of the Settings.settings file rather than the Application scope.
This works well for simple data types and when you have fixed values that will need to be saved because you need to define what variables you want to store at design time. So if your textboxes are dynamically created and you don't know many values you need to store it is not very useful.
Using IsolatedStorage might be another good option. You can create your own file in any format you want (keeping any values you need) and store it to the local machine in "IsolatedStorage".
You can create a folder somewhere on the disk and simply write a file in any suitable format (XML, plain text, your choice). You could for instance do this under the path pointed out by Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.ApplicationData) or Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.LocalApplicationData).
I would look into isolated storage. It is easy to set up per-user. And since it requires only partial trust, it will work for any deployment scenario.
Check this introduction.
Depending on how many variables/data you're looking to save the app.config/settings file can be the ideal place.
Check out the Settings Tab in the Project properties and note that you can set both Application settings and User settings. Application settings affect the entire application. User settings are stored per user.
The section of the app.config that contains user settings will be saved to the user directory when they are saved and reincorporated when they restart the app.
Check this url for an introduction to Application/user settings on MSDN and also this SO url for a similiar question.:
You could also look into storing your familiar old .ini files in a per user .ini by checking out the Special Folders enum as per this url.
I believe the proper place to store user settings in WinForms 2.0 would be in the settings file (not the config file). Here's a quick article for explanation.
Create a .config or other data file (e.g. xml) in the application data for the specific user.
use system.environment.specialfolder to get the ApplicationData folder, add a subfolder with your company name, within this a subfolder with your application name, within this your data file for this specific user. Thus,
Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.ApplicationData) + "\\YourCompany\\YourApplication\\YourData.config"