When working with domain models and POCO classes,

问题:

I am new to domain models, POCO and DDD, so I am still trying to get my head around a few ideas.

One of the things I could not figure out yet is how to keep my domain models simple and storage-agnostic but still capable of performing some queries over its data in a rich way.

For instance, suppose that I have an entity Order that has a collection of OrdemItems. I want to get the cheapest order item, for whatever reason, or maybe a list of order items that are not currently in stock. What I don't want to do is to retrieve all order items from storage and filter later (too expensive) so I want to end up having a db query of the type "SELECT .. WHERE ITEM.INSTOCK=FALSE" somehow. I don't want to have that SQL query in my entity, or any variation of if that would tie me into a specific platform, like NHibernate queries on Linq2SQL. What is the common solution in that case?

回答1:

Entities are the "units" of a domain. Repositories and services reference them, not vice versa. Think about it this way: do you carry the DMV in your pocket?

OrderItem is not an aggregate root; it should not be accessible through a repository. Its identity is local to an Order, meaning an Order will always be in scope when talking about OrderItems.

The difficulty of finding a home for the queries leads me to think of services. In this case, they would represent something about an Order that is hard for an Order itself to know.

Declare the intent in the domain project:

public interface ICheapestItemService
{
    OrderItem GetCheapestItem(Order order);
}

public interface IInventoryService
{
    IEnumerable<OrderItem> GetOutOfStockItems(Order order);
}

Declare the implementation in the data project:

public class CheapestItemService : ICheapestItemService
{
    private IQueryable<OrderItem> _orderItems;

    public CheapestItemService(IQueryable<OrderItem> orderItems)
    {
        _orderItems = orderItems;
    }

    public OrderItem GetCheapestItem(Order order)
    {
        var itemsByPrice =
            from item in _orderItems
            where item.Order == order
            orderby item.Price
            select item;

        return itemsByPrice.FirstOrDefault();
    }
}

public class InventoryService : IInventoryService
{
    private IQueryable<OrderItem> _orderItems;

    public InventoryService(IQueryable<OrderItem> orderItems)
    {
        _orderItems = orderItems;
    }

    public IEnumerable<OrderItem> GetOutOfStockItems(Order order)
    {
        return _orderItems.Where(item => item.Order == order && !item.InStock);
    }
}

This example works with any LINQ provider. Alternatively, the data project could use NHibernate's ISession and ICriteria to do the dirty work.

回答2:

Domain objects should be independent of storage, you should use the Repostiory pattern, or DAO to persist the objects. That way you are enforcing separation of concerns, the object itself should not know about how it is stored.

Ideally, it would be a good idea to put query construction inside of the repository, though I would use an ORM inside there.

Here's Martin Fowler's definition of the Repository Pattern.

回答3:

As I understand this style of design, you would encapsulate the query in a method of an OrderItemRepository (or perhaps more suitably OrderRepository) object, whose responsibility is to talk to the DB on one side, and return OrderItem objects on the other side. The Repository hides details of the DB from consumers of OrderItem instances.

回答4:

I would argue that it doesn't make sense to talk about "an Order that contains only the OrderItems that are not in stock". An "Order" (I presume) represents the complete list of whatever the client ordered; if you're filtering that list you're no longer dealing with an Order per se, you're dealing with a filtered list of OrderItems.

I think the question becomes whether you really want to treat Orders as an Aggregate Root, or whether you want to be able to pull arbitrary lists of OrderItems out of your data access layer as well.

You've said filtering items after they've come back from the database would be too expensive, but unless you're averaging hundreds or thousands of OrderItems for each order (or there's something else especially intensive about dealing with lots of OrderItems) you may be trying to optimize prematurely and making things more difficult than they need to be. I think if you can leave Order as the aggregate root and filter in your domain logic, your model will be cleaner to work with.

If that's genuinely not the case and you need to filter in the database, then you may want to consider having a separate OrderItem repository that would provide queries like "give me all of the OrderItems for this Order that are not in stock". You would then return those as an IList<OrderItem> (or IEnumerable<OrderItem>), since they're not a full Order, but rather some filtered collection of OrderItems.

回答5:

In the service layer.