yeah but then I have to do all sorts of "unit" testing, and "robust
fault-tolerant code", who has the time? ;-)

Jason

On Feb 5, 8:19 am, Markus Zywitza <[email protected]> wrote:
> We accept patches, did you know ? ;-)
>
> -Markus
>
> 2009/2/5 jasonsirota <[email protected]>:
>
>
>
> > Yes, it worked thank you for all your help, I ended up creating my own
> > static methods in inherited base classes so I can share the
> > functionality throughout the project, perhaps this isn't any cleaner,
> > but it makes me FEEL better :D
>
> >        public static T[] FindAll(bool cacheable)
> >        {
> >            if (!cacheable)
> >                return FindAll();
> >            else
> >                return FindAll(DetachedCriteria.For<T>()
> >                    .SetCacheable(cacheable));
> >        }
>
> >        public static T[] FindAll(Order order, bool cacheable)
> >        {
> >            return FindAll(DetachedCriteria.For<T>()
> >                .SetCacheable(cacheable)
> >                .AddOrder(order));
> >        }
>
> >        public static T[] FindAll(Order[] orders, bool cacheable)
> >        {
> >            return FindAll(DetachedCriteria.For<T>()
> >                .SetCacheable(cacheable),orders);
> >        }
>
> > On Feb 4, 8:20 pm, Daniel Pupek <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> You'll use the detached criterion a lot. Don't worry if the criterion 
> >> syntax
> >> seems a bit odd. You'll pick it up fast. For SQL junkies HQL tends to go
> >> down a bit easier...I hear that hql exhibits a little better performance 
> >> but
> >> we haven't noticed a difference.
> >> A couple notes though, you can't resuse a DetachedCriteria once it has been
> >> passed to activerecord. You can call .Clone though to get a replica of it.
> >> Don't try to over optimize things on your own by using the session or 
> >> static
> >> properties. You just end up stepping on top of what Nhibernate is doing for
> >> you. Nhibernate and active record have some interest ways to control the
> >> caching...you just have to play with it a bit and in the long run you'll be
> >> a lot happier.
>
> >> Don't worry about opening and closing sessions....ActiveRecord does a fair
> >> bit of the session handling for you. You'll just end up creating a bunch of
> >> Stack Overflows. If you have a non-trivial situation and believe you need 
> >> to
> >> circumvent the automatic session scopes then place your code inside of a
> >> using statement:
>
> >> using(new SessionScope())
> >> {
>
> >> Do some active record stuff here!
>
> >> }
>
> >> ActiveRecord will generally try to use the last sessionscope opened...the
> >> using statement ensures it is disposed properly.
>
> >> Dan
>
> >> Checkout my blog @http://blog.agilejedi.com
> >> Checkout my homepage @http://www.agilejedi.com
>
> >> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:07 PM, jasonsirota <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> > Interesting, that does seem easier. I thought there might be something
> >> > with DC but I couldn't figure out how to create one.
>
> >> > The reason I'm pulling all and caching is every page has a
> >> > "Categories" dropdown list that's needed before any dynamic items are
> >> > pulled from the database. So I could just pull the Name/ID pairs for
> >> > the dropdown list, populate it into a hash and cache it, but I know I
> >> > will need the category objects anyway and the overhead of pre-caching
> >> > the full list on application load is pretty low.
>
> >> > Jason
>
> >> > On Feb 4, 8:03 pm, Daniel Pupek <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > Try this:
> >> > > DetachedCriteria crit =
> >> > > DetachedCriteria.For<Category>()
> >> > >                 .SetCacheable(true)
> >> > >                 .AddOrder(new Order("SortOrder", true));
> >> > > Category[] categories = ActiveRecordMediator<Category>.FindAll();
>
> >> > > On a side not why are you trying to pull all categories? Just pull them
> >> > as
> >> > > they are needed (using find by primary key)...they will be cached as 
> >> > > they
> >> > > are pulled and subsequent calls will get the cached version.
>
> >> > > Dan
>
> >> > > Checkout my blog @http://blog.agilejedi.com
> >> > > Checkout my homepage @http://www.agilejedi.com
>
> >> > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 9:38 PM, jasonsirota <[email protected]> 
> >> > > wrote:
>
> >> > > > Okay I got this to work with this set of code:
>
> >> > > >            ISessionFactoryHolder holder =
> >> > > > ActiveRecordMediator.GetSessionFactoryHolder();
> >> > > >            ISession session = holder.CreateSession(typeof(Category));
> >> > > >            ICriteria crit = session.CreateCriteria(typeof(Category));
> >> > > >            crit.SetCacheable(true);
> >> > > >            crit.AddOrder(new Order("SortOrder",true));
> >> > > >            IList list = crit.List();
> >> > > >            Category[] defaultCategories = new Category[list.Count];
> >> > > >            list.CopyTo(defaultCategories, 0);
>
> >> > > > I feel like this is too many lines of code, is there some built in AR
> >> > > > functions. I feel like there should be something in AR
> >> > > > like:
>
> >> > > > Criteria crit = Category.CreateCriteria(); (a method of
> >> > > > ActiveRecordBase<Category>)
> >> > > > crit.SetCacheable(true);
> >> > > > crit.AddOrder(new Order("SortOrder",true));
> >> > > > Category.FindAll(crit);
>
> >> > > > or even better, overloads for find all
>
> >> > > > FindAll(bool cacheable)
>
> >> > > > Maybe I'm missing something....
>
> >> > > > On Feb 4, 5:11 pm, jasonsirota <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > > > So Ayende,
>
> >> > > > > Why isn't FindAll() cacheable? It seems like any time you'd want to
> >> > do
> >> > > > > a FindAll(), you'd want them to be cacheable...shouldn't all the
> >> > > > > activerecord generated queries be associated to a cache region, or
> >> > are
> >> > > > > they already?
>
> >> > > > > Jason
>
> >> > > > > On Feb 3, 6:20 pm, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > you need to enable query caching as well, and you need to mark 
> >> > > > > > the
> >> > > > query as
> >> > > > > > cachable.
> >> > > > > > I don't think you can do it using FindAll
>
> >> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 2:41 AM, jasonsirota <[email protected]>
> >> > > > wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > > For reference, here's my config:
>
> >> > > > > > >    <activerecord isWeb="true" isDebug="false"
>
> >> > threadinfotype="Castle.ActiveRecord.Framework.Scopes.HybridWebThreadScopeInfo,
> >> > > > > > > Castle.ActiveRecord">
> >> > > > > > >        <config>
> >> > > > > > >            <add key="connection.driver_class"
> >> > > > > > > value="NHibernate.Driver.SqlClientDriver" />
> >> > > > > > >            <add key="dialect"
> >> > > > > > > value="NHibernate.Dialect.MsSql2005Dialect" />
> >> > > > > > >            <add key="connection.provider"
> >> > > > > > > value="NHibernate.Connection.DriverConnectionProvider" />
> >> > > > > > >            <add key="connection.connection_string" 
> >> > > > > > > value="XXX"/>
> >> > > > > > >            <add key="proxyfactory.factory_class"
> >> > > > > > > value="NHibernate.ByteCode.Castle.ProxyFactoryFactory,
> >> > > > > > > NHibernate.ByteCode.Castle" />
> >> > > > > > >            <add key="cache.provider_class"
>
> >> > value="NHibernate.Caches.SysCache.SysCacheProvider,NHibernate.Caches.SysCache"
> >> > > > > > > /
>
> >> > > > > > >            <add key="relativeExpiration" value="300" />
> >> > > > > > >        </config>
> >> > > > > > >    </activerecord>
>
> >> > > > > > > On Feb 3, 4:37 pm, jasonsirota <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > I thought that you just had to wrap it in SessionScope, and
> >> > > > > > > > SessionScope is enabled for the full httprequest using the
> >> > > > httpmodule
>
> >> > > > > > > > However, just to be safe, I wrapped it in a transaction:
>
> >> > > > > > > >             Category[] defaultCategories;
> >> > > > > > > >             using (new TransactionScope(OnDispose.Commit))
> >> > > > > > > >             {
> >> > > > > > > >                 defaultCategories = Category.FindAll();
> >> > > > > > > >             }
>
> >> > > > > > > > However, I still get the multiple db calls.
>
> >> > > > > > > > On Feb 3, 4:23 pm, Stefan Sedich <[email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > > > > Do you not need to wrap your call to get all in a
> >> > transaction? I
> >> > > > > > > > > thought second level cache was only commited on commit of a
> >> > > > > > > > > transaction?
>
> >> > > > > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > > > > > Stefan
>
> >> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM, jasonsirota <
> >> > > > [email protected]>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > After wrestling with the trunk version of ActiveRecord 
> >> > > > > > > > > > and
> >> > > > NHibernate
> >> > > > > > > > > > and NH-Contrib version numbers I finally got cache 
> >> > > > > > > > > > support
> >> > > > enabled
> >> > > > > > > for
> >> > > > > > > > > > the AR project, however I'm having trouble getting it to
> >> > work.
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > The call is something like:
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > Category.FindAll(new Order("SortOrder"),true)
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > which returns a list of category sorted by the db field
> >> > > > "SortOrder".
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > I've enabled caching on the Category object like:
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > [ActiveRecord("Categories", Cache=CacheEnum.ReadOnly)]
> >> > > > > > > > > > public class Category
> >> > > > > > > > > > ...
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > However, each time the page loads, it requeries the
> >> > database
> >> > > > instead
> >> > > > > > > > > > of pulling the resulting list from the cache.
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > SELECT this_.CategoryID as CategoryID4_0_,
> >> > this_.Description as
> >> > > > > > > > > > Descript2_4_0_, this_.SortOrder as SortOrder4_0_,
> >> > this_.Type as
> >> > > > > > > > > > Type4_0_ FROM BudgeterCategories this_ ORDER BY
> >> > this_.SortOrder
> >> > > > asc
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > Any ideas?
> >> > > > > > > > > > Jason
>
> >> > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > Stefan Sedich
> >> > > > > > > > > Software Developerhttp://weblogs.asp.net/stefansedich
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Castle Project Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to