-1

I have 3 classes

class Backup
end

class Database
end

Class App
end

The backup database has a reference to Database and App, like

class Backup
  def getDatabase
    Database.create
  end

  def getApp
    App.create
  end
end

Similarly Database has a reference to App. Practically, If I am creating a backup object, it create a Database object and an App object.

Today I am deriving only two references, in future I might add new references.

The nested objects I am creating, I might use them or I might not.

I think creating these many nested objects might show impact on performance, I hope you are seeing my point.

How can I avoid performance degradation overtime or do I have to modify my design ?

Any suggestions, much appreciated.

Improve this question
5
  • Sorry, but what kind of pseudo-code notation is this? In particular, I don't understand def getDatabase / Database.create / end - does this really create a new database object? Is this method supposed to return this new object? Shouldn't there be just one database object and one app object in your whole application? Commented Jun 21, 2023 at 4:02
  • @DocBrown, I wrote with Ruby in mind, Please excuse me for syntax errors. Commented Jun 21, 2023 at 15:11
  • 1
    I think @DocBrown has a point. The name Database.create implies a new database object is created each time this method is invoked. Is that true? Commented Jun 22, 2023 at 13:18
  • @GregBurghardt, yes a new DB object will be created and the created DB object refers to the Database to which the backup associated. Commented Jun 22, 2023 at 14:27
  • 1
    I think this could be an answerable question, but the additional information you provided in the comments should go in the question body text. Plus, a comment on mmathis's answer mentions that you are implementing this in JavaScript, not Ruby. The programming language and runtime environment might make a difference. Given the limited and confusing information we have, the answer from mmathis is probably the best you can get until we get more information. Commented Jun 22, 2023 at 20:26

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3

How can I avoid performance degradation overtime or do I have to modify my design ?

Performance isn't an issue until it is. Meaning, in general, we don't worry about how bad performance might be, until we are able to actually measure how bad - or good - performance actually is.

The nested objects I am creating, I might use them or I might not.

That said, if you won't need the objects, don't create them and don't reference them. If you will need them, then obviously create them. If you're not sure, why aren't you?

The bigger problem I see with your approach, as you've described it, is that the Backup class creates both the Database and App references it needs - but you also say the Database has a reference to the App. Does Database create its own App? Or do you wind up with two different instances of App, when they really should be the same because it's the same application?

If that's the case, then your Database class should have the App object injected - thru the constructor, some DI container, whatever. Your Backup class may need to do the same with the Database.

Improve this answer
1
  • Yes, Backup->App and Database->App both are same. And yes you are correct, when I call backup.getDatabase it will create a database object and when backup.getDatabase.getApp called , it will also create an app object. And when backup.getApp called, an app object will also be created. As I am using in JavaScript, is it possible to avoid creating multiple objects for same reference ? Commented Jun 21, 2023 at 15:11

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.