Synopse

To content | To menu | To search

mORMot Framework

Entries feed

2014, Friday September 12

Legacy code, mORMot, and database sharing

It is pretty much possible that you would have to maintain and evolve a legacy project, based on an existing database, with a lot of already written SQL statements - see Legacy code and existing projects.

For instance, you would like to use mORMot for new features, and/or add mobile or HTML clients - see Cross-Platform clients.
In this case, the ORM advanced features - like ORM Cache or BATCH process, see BATCH sequences for adding/updating/deleting records - may conflict with the legacy code, for the tables which may have to be shared.
Here are some guidelines when working on such a project.

To be exhaustive about your question, we need to consider each ORM CRUD operation.
We may have to divide them in three kinds: read queries, insertions, and modifications of existing data.

Continue reading...

2014, Wednesday August 20

List your app on mORMot ShowCase

If you use our little mORMot framework in any of your project, commercial or not, please report it to a new forum thread dedicated for this!
Sounds like if more and more projects are using our little rodent...
The cross-platform clients did increase its popularity, as far as I found out, in the last days.

Furthermore, if you accept that your application is quoted in our framework documentation and web site, and/or your logo displayed, please notify it in the application post or by email to us.

The first listed application - EasyMail7 Client-Server Email Marketing Solution - is indeed impressive, and shows well the Client-Server and storage abilities of the framework.

Continue reading...

2014, Monday August 11

Cross-Platform mORMot Clients - Generating Code Wrappers

Current version of the main framework units target only Win32 and Win64 systems.

It allows to make easy self-hosting of mORMot servers for local business applications in any corporation, or pay cheap hosting in the Cloud, since mORMot CPU and RAM expectations are much lower than a regular IIS-WCF-MSSQL-.Net stack.
But in a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), you would probably need to create clients for platforms outside the Windows world, especially mobile devices.

A set of cross-platform client units is therefore available in the CrossPlatform sub-folder of the source code repository. It allows writing any client in modern object pascal language, for:

  • Any version of Delphi, on any platform (Mac OSX, or any mobile supported devices);
  • FreePascal Compiler 2.7.1;
  • Smart Mobile Studio 2.1, to create AJAX or mobile applications (via PhoneGap, if needed).

This series of articles will introduce you to mORMot's Cross-Platform abilities:

Any feedback is welcome in our forum, as usual!

Continue reading...

Cross-Platform mORMot Clients - Units and Platforms

Current version of the main framework units target only Win32 and Win64 systems.

It allows to make easy self-hosting of mORMot servers for local business applications in any corporation, or pay cheap hosting in the Cloud, since mORMot CPU and RAM expectations are much lower than a regular IIS-WCF-MSSQL-.Net stack.
But in a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), you would probably need to create clients for platforms outside the Windows world, especially mobile devices.

A set of cross-platform client units is therefore available in the CrossPlatform sub-folder of the source code repository. It allows writing any client in modern object pascal language, for:

  • Any version of Delphi, on any platform (Mac OSX, or any mobile supported devices);
  • FreePascal Compiler 2.7.1;
  • Smart Mobile Studio 2.1, to create AJAX or mobile applications (via PhoneGap, if needed).

This series of articles will introduce you to mORMot's Cross-Platform abilities:

Any feedback is welcome in our forum, as usual!

Continue reading...

2014, Tuesday August 5

Returning content as XML

By default, interface-based services of a mORMot server will always return a JSON array (or a JSON object, if TServiceFactoryServer.ResultAsJSONObject is true).
With some kind of clients (e.g. if they are made by a third party), it could be useful to return XML content instead.

Your mORMot server is able to let its interface-based services return XML context instead, or in addition to the default JSON format.

Continue reading...

2014, Friday June 27

RoadMap refreshed

We did some cleaning in the mORMot official RoadMap.
Now feature requests tickets will detail all to-do items we would like to implement.

Current framework RoadMap and implementation is in fact going into a pragmatic direction.
No need to make all framework's unit compatible at once: so we introduced some client-dedicated units, without any dependency on SynCommons.pas.

We would like to implement (in this order):

The CrossPlatform folder already contains units which compile under all Delphi compilers (VCL and FMX), and FPC.

But perhaps we would move the server to Linux, either via FPC, or using Delphi itself!

Continue reading...

2014, Sunday June 22

Audit-trail for ORM change tracking

Since most CRUD operations are centered within the scope of our mORMot server, we implemented in the ORM an integrated mean of tracking changes (aka Audit Trail) of any TSQLRecord.
In short, our ORM is transformed into a time-machine, just like the good old DeLorean!

Keeping a track of the history of business objects is one very common need for software modeling, and a must-have for any accurate data modeling, like Domain-Driven Design.
By default, as expected by the OOP model, any change to an object will forget any previous state of this object. But thanks to mORMot's exclusive change-tracking feature, you can persist the history of your objects.

Enabling audit-trail

By default, change-tracking feature will be disabled, saving performance and disk use.
But you can enable change tracking for any class, by calling the following method, on server side:

 aServer.TrackChanges([TSQLInvoice]);

This single line will let aServer: TSQLRestServer monitor all CRUD operations, and store all changes of the TSQLInvoice table within a TSQLRecordHistory table.

Continue reading...

2014, Friday May 9

BREAKING CHANGE: TSQLRestServerStatic* classes are now renamed as TSQLRestStorage*

From the beginning, server-side storage tables which were not store in a SQLite3 database were implemented via some classes inheriting from TSQLRestServerStatic.
This TSQLRestServerStatic was inheriting from TSQLRestServer
, which did not make much sense (but was made for laziness years ago, if I remember well).

Now, a new TSQLRestStorage class, directly inheriting from TSQLRest, is used for per-table storage.
This huge code refactoring results in a much cleaner design, and will enhance code maintainability.
Documentation has been updated to reflect the changes.

Note that this won't change anything when using the framework (but the new class names): it is an implementation detail, which had to be fixed.

Continue reading...

2014, Wednesday May 7

MongoDB + mORMot benchmark

Here are some benchmark charts about MongoDB integration in mORMot's ORM.

MongoDB appears as a serious competitor to SQL databases, with the potential benefit of horizontal scaling and installation/administration ease - performance is very high, and its document-based storage fits perfectly with mORMot's advanced ORM features like Shared nothing architecture (or sharding).

Continue reading...

MongoDB + mORMot ORM = ODM

MongoDB (from "humongous") is a cross-platform document-oriented database system, and certainly the best known NoSQL database.
According to http://db-engines.com in April 2014, MongoDB is in 5th place of the most popular types of database management systems, and first place for NoSQL database management systems.
Our mORMot gives premium access to this database, featuring full NoSQL and Object-Document Mapping (ODM) abilities to the framework.

Integration is made at two levels:

  • Direct low-level access to the MongoDB server, in the SynMongoDB.pas unit;
  • Close integration with our ORM (which becomes defacto an ODM), in the mORMotMongoDB.pas unit.

MongoDB eschews the traditional table-based relational database structure in favor of JSON-like documents with dynamic schemas (MongoDB calls the format BSON), which matches perfectly mORMot's RESTful approach.

This second article will focus on integration of MongoDB with our ORM.

Continue reading...

2014, Friday April 18

Introducing mORMot's architecture and design principles

We have just released a set of slides introducing 

  • ORM, SOA, REST, JSON, MVC, MVVM, SOLID, Mocks/Stubs, Domain-Driven Design concepts with Delphi, 
  • and showing some sample code using our Open Source mORMot framework.

You can follow the public link on Google Drive!

This is a great opportunity to discovers some patterns you may not be familiar with, and find out how mORMot try to implement them.
This set of slides may be less intimidating than our huge documentation - do not be terrified by our 1400 pages Software Architecture Design pdf!

Feedback is welcome on our forum, as usual.

2014, Friday March 7

Support of MySQL, DB2 and PostgreSQL

We just tested, benchmarked and validated Oracle MySQL, IBM DB2 and PostgreSQL support for our SynDB database classes and the mORMot's ORM core.
This article will also show all updated results, including our newly introduced multi-value INSERT statement generations, which speed up a lot BATCH insertion.

Stay tuned!

Purpose here is not to say that one library or database is better or faster than another, but publish a snapshot of mORMot persistence layer abilities, depending on each access library.

In this timing, we do not benchmark only the "pure" SQL/DB layer access (SynDB units), but the whole Client-Server ORM of our framework.

Process below includes all aspects of our ORM:

  • Access via high level CRUD methods (Add/Update/Delete/Retrieve, either per-object or in BATCH mode);
  • Read and write access of TSQLRecord instances, via optimized RTTI;
  • JSON marshaling of all values (ready to be transmitted over a network);
  • REST routing, with security, logging and statistic;
  • Virtual cross-database layer using its SQLite3 kernel;
  • SQL on-the-fly generation and translation (in virtual mode);
  • Access to the database engines via several libraries or providers.

In those tests, we just bypassed the communication layer, since TSQLRestClient and TSQLRestServer are run in-process, in the same thread - as a TSQLRestServerDB instance. So you have here some raw performance testimony of our framework's ORM and RESTful core, and may expect good scaling abilities when running on high-end hardware, over a network.

On a recent notebook computer (Core i7 and SSD drive), depending on the back-end database interfaced, mORMot excels in speed, as will show the following benchmark:

  • You can persist up to 570,000 objects per second, or retrieve 870,000 objects per second (for our pure Delphi in-memory engine);
  • When data is retrieved from server or client 38, you can read more than 900,000 objects per second, whatever the database back-end is;
  • With a high-performance database like Oracle, and our direct access classes, you can write 70,000 (via array binding) and read 160,000 objects per second, over a 100 MB network;
  • When using alternate database access libraries (e.g. Zeos, or DB.pas based classes), speed is lower (even if comparable for DB2, MS SQL, PostgreSQL, MySQL) but still enough for most work, due to some optimizations in the mORMot code (e.g. caching of prepared statements, SQL multi-values insertion, direct export to/from JSON, SQlite3 virtual mode design, avoid most temporary memory allocation...).

Difficult to find a faster ORM, I suspect.

Continue reading...

2014, Monday March 3

ORM enhanced for BATCH insert

We just committed some nice features to the ORM kernel, and SynDB* classes of our mORMot framework.

During BATCH insertion, the ORM is able to generate some optimized SQL statements, depending on the target database, to send several rows of data at once.
It induces a noticeable speed increase when saving several objects into an external database.

This feature is available for SQlite3 (3.7.11 and later), MySQL, PostgreSQL, MS SQL Server (2008 and up), Oracle, Firebird and NexusDB.
Since it is working at SQL level, it is available for all supported access libraries, e.g. ODBC, OleDB, Zeos/ZDBC, UniDAC, FireDAC.
It means that even properties not implementing array binding (like OleDB, Zeos or UniDAC) are able to have a huge boost at data insertion, ready to compete with the (until now) more optimized libraries.

Continue reading...

2014, Friday February 28

Are NoSQL databases ACID?

One of the main features you may miss when discovering NoSQL ("Not-Only SQL"?) databases, coming from a RDBMS background, is ACID.

ACID (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability) is a set of properties that guarantee that database transactions are processed reliably. In the context of databases, a single logical operation on the data is called a transaction. For example, a transfer of funds from one bank account to another, even involving multiple changes such as debiting one account and crediting another, is a single transaction. (Wikipedia)

But are there any ACID NoSQL database?

Please ensure you read the Martin Fowler introduction about NoSQL databases.
And the corresponding video.

First of all, we can distinguish two types of NoSQL databases:

  1. Aggregate-oriented databases;
  2. Graph-oriented databases (e.g. Neo4J).

By design, most Graph-oriented databases are ACID!
This is a first good point.

Then, what about the other type?
In Aggregate-oriented databases, we can identify three sub-types:

  • Document-based NoSQL databases (e.g. MongoDB, CouchDB);
  • Key/Value NoSQL databases (e.g. Redis);
  • Column family NoSQL databases (e.g. Cassandra).
Whatever document/key/column oriented they are, they all use some kind of document storage.
It may be schema-less, blob-stored, column-driven, but it is always some set of values bound together to be persisted.
This set of values define a particular state of one entity, in a given model.
Which we may call Aggregate.

Continue reading...

2014, Tuesday February 25

TDocVariant custom variant type

With revision 1.18 of the framework, we just introduced two new custom types of variants:

  • TDocVariant kind of variant;
  • TBSONVariant kind of variant.

The second custom type (which handles MongoDB-specific extensions - like ObjectID or other specific types like dates or binary) will be presented later, when dealing with MongoDB support in mORMot, together with the BSON kind of content. BSON / MongoDB support is implemented in the SynMongoDB.pas unit.

We will now focus on TDocVariant itself, which is a generic container of JSON-like objects or arrays.
This custom variant type is implemented in SynCommons.pas unit, so is ready to be used everywhere in your code, even without any link to the mORMot ORM kernel, or MongoDB.

TDocVariant documents

TDocVariant implements a custom variant type which can be used to store any JSON/BSON document-based content, i.e. either:

  • Name/value pairs, for object-oriented documents;
  • An array of values (including nested documents), for array-oriented documents;
  • Any combination of the two, by nesting TDocVariant instances.

Here are the main features of this custom variant type:

  • DOM approach of any object or array documents;
  • Perfect storage for dynamic value-objects content, with a schema-less approach (as you may be used to in scripting languages like Python or JavaScript);
  • Allow nested documents, with no depth limitation but the available memory;
  • Assignment can be either per-value (default, safest but slower when containing a lot of nested data), or per-reference (immediate reference-counted assignment);
  • Very fast JSON serialization / un-serialization with support of MongoDB-like extended syntax;
  • Access to properties in code, via late-binding (including almost no speed penalty due to our VCL hack as already detailed);
  • Direct access to the internal variant names and values arrays from code, by trans-typing into a TDocVariantData record;
  • Instance life-time is managed by the compiler (like any other variant type), without the need to use interfaces or explicit try..finally blocks;
  • Optimized to use as little memory and CPU resource as possible (in contrast to most other libraries, it does not allocate one class instance per node, but rely on pre-allocated arrays);
  • Opened to extension of any content storage - for instance, it will perfectly integrate with BSON serialization and custom MongoDB types (ObjectID, RegEx...), to be used in conjunction with MongoDB servers;
  • Perfectly integrated with our Dynamic array wrapper and its JSON serialization as with the record serialization;
  • Designed to work with our mORMot ORM: any TSQLRecord instance containing such variant custom types as published properties will be recognized by the ORM core, and work as expected with any database back-end (storing the content as JSON in a TEXT column);
  • Designed to work with our mORMot SOA: any interface-based service is able to consume or publish such kind of content, as variant kind of parameters;
  • Fully integrated with the Delphi IDE: any variant instance will be displayed as JSON in the IDE debugger, making it very convenient to work with.

To create instances of such variant, you can use some easy-to-remember functions:

  • _Obj() _ObjFast() global functions to create a variant object document;
  • _Arr() _ArrFast() global functions to create a variant array document;
  • _Json() _JsonFast() _JsonFmt() _JsonFastFmt() global functions to create any variant object or array document from JSON, supplied either with standard or MongoDB-extended syntax.

Continue reading...

2014, Friday January 10

RESTful mORMot

Our Synopse mORMot Framework was designed in accordance with Fielding's REST architectural style without using HTTP and without interacting with the World Wide Web.
Such Systems which follow REST principles are often referred to as "RESTful".

Optionally, the Framework is able to serve standard HTTP/1.1 pages over the Internet (by using the mORMotHttpClient / mORMotHttpServer units and the TSQLHttpServer and TSQLHttpClient classes), in an embedded low resource and fast HTTP server.

Continue reading...

REpresentational State Transfer (REST)

Representational state transfer (REST) is a style of software architecture for distributed hypermedia systems such as the World Wide Web.
As such, it is not just a method for building "web services". The terms "representational state transfer" and "REST" were introduced in 2000 in the doctoral dissertation of Roy Fielding, one of the principal authors of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) specification, on which the whole Internet rely.

 

There are 5 basic fundamentals of web which are leveraged to create REST services:

  1. Everything is a Resource;
  2. Every Resource is Identified by a Unique Identifier;
  3. Use Simple and Uniform Interfaces;
  4. Communication is Done by Representation;
  5. Every Request is Stateless.

Continue reading...

2014, Tuesday January 7

Some enhancements to REST routing of interface-based services

We have just committed some enhancements to interface-based service process.

TSQLRestRoutingREST will now recognize several URI schemes, like new  root/Calculator/Add?n1=1&n2=2 alternative could be pretty convenient to be consumed from some REST clients.

Please find here a documentation update.

Continue reading...

2014, Sunday January 5

AES encryption over HTTP

In addition to regular HTTPS flow encryption, which is not easy to setup due to the needed certificates, mORMot proposes a proprietary encryption scheme. It is based on SHA-256 and AES-256/CTR algorithms, so is known to be secure.

You do not need to setup anything on the server or the client configuration, just run the TSQLHttpClient and TSQLHttpServer classes with the corresponding parameters.

Continue reading...

2014, Saturday January 4

Domain-Driven Design: part 4

One year ago, we already made a quick presentation of Domain-Driven Design, in the context of our mORMot framework.
After one year of real-world application of those patterns, it is now time to give more light to DDD.

Let's continue with part 4, which will define Domain-Driven Design as could be implemented with our Synopse mORMot framework

Continue reading...

- page 1 of 6