As I have posted before also,I am developing a site in two languages done in CakePHP.
Now the latest problem I am facing in my application is that the application is not sharing the Cache values between the Main Domain and the Subdomain.Please help me out of this mess...!!!
Thanks in advance.
There are 3 problems connected to this.
Data you're caching manually by using Cache::read() and Cache::write()
Just use a prefix for each subdomain when using the methods.
Element caching
you can solve this "almost" elegantly by following these steps:
Create my_view.php (or whatever) in app/views
Content:
class MyView extends View {
}
Search for view.php in the Cake Core and copy the element() method to your newly created class. Add your subdomain prefix in the part where the caching happens
In your AppController::beforeFilter() write
$this->view = 'MyView';
Now you have control over the CakePHP view layer. You have just overridden the element method.
Alternatively to this approach (if your codebase isn't already using elements extensively) you could just create a helper with a method, that takes the same arguments as the View::element() method, add the subdomain key to the cache options and call the orginal element() method.
Full Page Caching
This is a tricky one. The full page caching happens in the dispatch() method before you have any possibility to modify the behavior. The second problem is, that CakePHP uses the relative URL of the page to cache it. The relative URLs are most likely identical under your different subdomains.
I think the simplest approach here is to create a Dispatcher class, which extends the original dispatcher. Override the cached() method and implement your desired behavior, like the prefixes. Then in your app/webroot/index.php you need to change this line
$Dispatcher = new Dispatcher();
...to your new class name.
Related
One of the requirements of the project I am working on is that I log the connections made to the site, due to the amount of processing being done to get as much information as possible I would like to process this after the page has been sent back to the user.
At the moment I am running my code in the afterFilter of my appController:
public function afterFilter(Event $event){
$log_request = new RequestsController;
$log_request->log_request();
}
I am attempting to run this in afterRender of my appController:
public function afterRender(Event $event, $viewFile){
$log_request = new RequestsController;
$log_request->log_request();
}
But I can not seem to get the code to execute or if it does then I do not know how to find out what the error being thrown is.
If somebody can point me towards an example of this being done or a concurrent method of doing this (it needs to be logged within a second of the request) I would appreciate it.
$log_request = new RequestsController; you don't instantiate controllers inside controllers. You want to learn the MVC design pattern first when using a MVC based framework or you'll end up with a non maintainable piece of horrible spaghetti code. I recommend you to do the blog tutorial to get a basic understanding.
If somebody can point me towards an example of this being done or a concurrent method of doing this (it needs to be logged within a second of the request) I would appreciate it.
Read this chapter: CakePHP Logging Taken from there:
Logging data in CakePHP is easy - the log() function is provided by the LogTrait, which is the common ancestor for many CakePHP classes. If the context is a CakePHP class (Controller, Component, View,...), you can log your data. You can also use Log::write() directly.
Add the log trait to the AppController, pass the request to the log() method and configure the logging to log these requests to whatever you prefer either in afterRender() or if you want to do it really late, do it in __destruct().
Does anybody knows why BlockData class doesn't directly implement IContent?
I know that during BlockData is being retrieve from database, proxy created by Castle implements IContent.
If StackOverflow isn't suitable place for this kind of a question, please move it.
Johan Björnfot at EPiServer explains some of the details in this post.
Excerpt:
"In previous versions of CMS was pages (PageData) the only content type that the content repository (traditionally DataFactory) handled. In CMS7 this has changed so now content repository (IContentRepository) handles IContent instances. This means that the requirement for a .NET type to be possible to save/load from content repository is that it implements the interface EPiServer.Core.IContent.
There are some implementations of IContent built into CMS like PageData and ContentFolder (used to group shared block instances) and it is also possible to register custom IContent implementations.If you look at BlockData though you will notice that it doesn’t implement IContent, how is then shared block instances handled?
The answer is that during runtime when a shared block instance is created (e.g. through a call to IContentRepository.GetDefault where T is a type inheriting from BlockData) the CMS will create a new .NET type inheriting T using a technic called mixin where the new generated subclass will implement some extra interfaces (including IContent)."
BlockData does implement IContent as it is intended to work both when added to another content item such as a PageData instance (a.k.a. Local Block), and as a standalone instance (a.k.a.Shared Block). In latter case the interface is added by using a mix-in though Castle Windsor so that it can be referenced.
The decision for this construct was based on wanting to be able to use the same rendering templates regardless if a block is local or shared. Therefor the choice stood between having a large number of empty properties on local blocks or the current solution using mixins. Both options were tested and mixins was selected as the preferred solution even though it's not a perfect one.
BlockData "does implement IContent", just do:
var myContent = (IContent)myBlock;
But, if you're by any chance handling a Block which itself is a property (not a ContentReference), that cast will throw an exception.
This will be true for 100% of all cases (... using Math.Round).
This is a multi part question.
Background:
I'm building my first site using CakePHP, and I like it so far. I've got a DB setup, initial data loaded, and a few models, views, and controllers to interface with the data.
I've created a globally accessible function to create Add/Edit/Delete type image links in various areas. It will be used across multiple views, so I need it accessible, essentially, everywhere. The function is defined in /app/config/bootstrap.php. I was hoping to use the HTML Helper's $html->image() and $html->link() methods to facilitate this, but they're not available in bootstrap.php and I'm not sure how to load/access the HTML Helper where I've defined my function.
Questions:
1) Is this a reasonable/idiomatic place to define a function of this sort?
2) If this isn't the correct place to define the function, where should I define it?
3) If this is the correct place to define the function, how can I go about loading various CakePHP helpers?
Again, I am new to CakePHP, so please let me know if my question is unclear, and forgive my ignorance. I've read/searched through a fair amount of the CakePHP documentation and while I can find plenty of references to loading helpers within Controllers via App::import(...); or $helpers = array(...);, I do not seem to have access to the App object and the $helpers member is specific to the AppController class, I assume. I assume I'm going about this incorrectly, so please help me understand the Cake way of accomplishing this.
No, that is not the correct place for such a function (or more accurately, it goes against the MVC paradigm). A better approach would be to create your own helper for the function. Depending on the complexity of the links you could also use elements.
As a rule of thumb only functions that are completely independent of anything else in the app should be in bootstrap.php, and even most of those would often be better somewhere else.
I'm trying to wrap my head around backbone.js but I'm finding it hard due to the lack of (IMO) good examples.
First of all, what is the best way of getting a link to an object.
If I want to get the edit url of an Album model I could do album.url() + '/edit', is this really the best way?
Also, I'm trying to make my application work 100% without javascript so I don't want my URLs/links to say /albums/#1/edit, I want it to be /albums/1/edit and override this in JS.
I'm thinking I create normal URLs and use jQuery.live to call router.navigate in backbone.js
I never got this to work however, when I call router.navigate('/albums/2', true) the URL changes but my show action is never called. If I refresh it's called so the route is matched.
What am I missing?
The basic answer, which is kind of frustrating, is "there is no preferred way!". Backbone.js doesn't tell you how to set up links, you can do it any way you like. I found this flexibility just as annoying as you do, at least at first.
So here's the way I'm approaching this on my current project, with the (big) caveat that this is just one of many ways to do things in Backbone:
For the most part, I don't use actual links. There's no explicit reason not to, but it means you have to keep track of a bunch of URL strings that have to be consistent. I would rather stick all the URL formatting in my routers and not deal with it elsewhere.
To open a new "top-level" view, like an editing screen, I set something that fires an event. In the application I'm currently working on, I have a global State model, and to open a new view I call state.set({ topview: MyTopView }). This causes the state object to trigger change:topview.
Any piece of the UI that needs to change when the top-level view changes has an update method bound to change:topview. When the event fires, they look at state.get('topview') and update as necessary.
I treat my routers as only marginally specialized parts of the UI - they're essentially views that render in the browser address bar, rather than the window. Like other views, they update the state object on UI events (i.e. a new URL), and like other views, they listen to the state object for changes that cause them to update. The logic that the editing screen has the URL albums/<albumid>/edit is fully encapsulated in the router, and I don't refer to it anywhere else.
This works well for me, but it adds an entirely new pattern, the global State object, to the Backbone structure, so I can hardly call this the "preferred" approach.
Update: Also note that .url(), in the Backbone idiom, refers to the model's URL in the back-end API, not the front-end URL (it's not like Django's get_absolute_url). There is no method in the default Backbone setup that gives you a user-facing URL for your model - you'd have to write this yourself.
Also, I'm trying to make my application work 100% without javascript; so I don't want my URLs/links to say /albums/#1/edit, I want it to be /albums/1/edit and override this in JS.
you can do exactly this w/ pushState. just enable it in your Backbone.history.start call:
Backbone.history.start({pushState: true})
this tells Backbone to use the HTML5 History API (a.k.a. "PushState"), which uses full URLs exactly like you're wanting.
read up on the history api here: http://diveintohtml5.ep.io/history.html
and I wrote up a 2 part series on using pushstate w/ the second part focusing on progressive enhancement in backbone, to do what you're needing:
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/09/26/seo-and-accessibility-with-html5-pushstate-part-1-introducing-pushstate/
and
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/09/26/seo-and-accessibility-with-html5-pushstate-part-2-progressive-enhancement-with-backbone-js/
hope that helps :)
I have an admin controller that I would like to utilize functions in other controllers (these functions do not represent pages that someone would load in their browser), but it cannot utilize those functions because the functions in the other controllers are private. They are private because I don't want the public to access them. Is there a way to make a controller function not accesible to the public without making the function private or protected?
public function __blah(){
// function that can't be accessed from outside, but can be called from other functions
}
Based on what I've read in the comment of the answer Piotr gave you:
You don't use an admin controller. You want to use admin prefixes:
http://book.cakephp.org/view/950/Prefix-Routing
And authentication:
http://book.cakephp.org/view/1250/Authentication
If you call - and thats how your comment sounds like - one controller from another you're doing something totally wrong in an MVC framework. If it should be re-usable code it should go into components if it's about admin action use the prefix routing and admin_* methods, auth component and protected methods for what you call "helper" methods.
Yes.
You have a lot of information in the CakePHP Book about ACL (access control list) and that is exactly what you're looking for.
Or you may use Auth component.
I see three possible solutions (they can also be combined):
The first solution is to move the code you want to reuse to components (as mentioned by burzum).
The second solution depends on your code. It's possible that you do stuff in the controller which should be done in the model. In this case, move the respective code to the model.
The third solution is to put the code you want to reuse into plain old PHP classes and load them as vendor files.