Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools


You are here: Home / weblog / Why the "new" Tridion events system is a game-changer

Why the "new" Tridion events system is a game-changer

Posted by Dominic Cronin at Sep 14, 2013 07:45 PM |
Filed under: , ,

When SDL released Tridion 2011, a lot had changed. So much so, that the introduction of a new Events system was almost unremarkable. After all, they had to replace the old one, so there was a new one. Nothing to see here, move along now please. Most of the effort in those days went into a flurry of upgrades and ports of old-style events systems to the new architecture. So you might be forgiven if you hadn't ever stopped to think just how much of a difference the new architecture makes. Specifically - we now subscribe to events using a mechanism based  on .NET multicast delegates. This has a couple of consequences.

Firstly, we are freed from the need to write dispatchers. To implement an events system with the old "COM+"-based system, you would implement an interface containing all the event handler methods, and register your implementation with a specific COM ProgID. Tridion would ask COM+ to instantiate an object of that ProgID, and merrily call into whichever of the interface methods were configured to be called. This meant there could only be one implementation. All your functionality had to be in that implementation, even if different parts of your system had different requirements.  So if, for example, you were using Tridion for your Internet site and for your intranet, or for whatever other reason you were running diverse sites, then you'd need a dispatcher. This would be a simple events system implementation that did nothing more than pass on the calls to one of several different implementations, usually depending on configuration. So calls coming from your Internet publications would go to one DLL, and the ones from your intranet would go to another, but Tridion itself would only see one interface: that of your dispatcher. This was quite a pain. You could separate out different concerns this way, but you wouldn't want to do more than carving it up into very big chunks. Like I said - Internet and intranet, or maybe different customers or departments. Nothing more fine-grained than that anyway. The new events system meant we didn't need to have a dispatcher any more, and the "configuration" could mostly be baked into the code itself.

For myself, (and I suspect for others), this was such a relief that it was enough. It wasn't until some time later that I realised that it was just a beginning. We'd got so used to limiting ourselves to big chunks that it didn't really sink in that we could really start slicing things up. The game-changer I referred to in the title of this piece is exactly that. We can slice it up as small as we want. OK - big deal, you might say - but if we can slice it up arbitrarily, then we can write an events system implementation for a single concern. And that means [ta-da!!] that we can start making re-usable modules that can just be "dropped in" on whatever project needs them. I recently wrote a Component Save event handler that enforces height and width constraints on multimedia components. It does one thing - that's all, so I can use it whenever I have that need. When I went to configure it, I noticed that on my research system I already have three other events handlers registered. These are all from Tridion, and belong to Audience Manager, UGC, and External Content Library respectively. Without looking, I don't know or care whether any of them subscribes to the Initiated phase of a Component Save. They can all co-exist.

So now I'm looking forward to seeing a lot more (small and useful) events systems made available in the community - the days are gone when an events system only made sense for a single implementation.

Filed under: , ,