@nadav s: Could you explain the difference between this mechanism and
using ISession.Lock(entity, LockMode.None) from
http://nhforge.org/doc/nh/en/index.html#manipulatingdata-update-lock?
If I understand correctly, that allows you to re-associated objects
loaded from different sessions. The reason I currently reload them is
to guarantee data consistency, accepting the overhead.

On Sep 15, 3:19 pm, nadav s <[email protected]> wrote:
> you are exactly correct. by using a proxy to save the state of the entity
> inside of it, the tracking of you're entity's state is no longer restricted
> to a specific session, meaning you don't have to refetch the entity within
> the current session, but can just attach (using the saveOrUpdate method) a
> previously fetched entity (or entities) to the current session, and the
> entity's state is being kept. Also, lazy loading is still being enabled...
> so you can have session per view and just attach the working entity each
> time a session is being opened.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, pvginkel <[email protected]> wrote:
> > @matanzg: I'm not quite sure how this would work. I would suspect a
> > second level cache is limited to the work station of the end user, so
> > this does not solve changes in the database while a workflow is
> > running.
>
> > Could you give an example of how such system would improve on my
> > situation? Specifically, what problem does it solve?
>
> > On Sep 15, 2:29 pm, matanzg <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Why not use second level cache for data consistency?
>
> > > On 15 ספטמבר, 08:13, pvginkel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > @nadav s: If I understand this correctly, this would allow me to re-
> > > > use the same entity instance throughout the client application over
> > > > different sessions/workflows/views/threads. Is that correct, or am I
> > > > missing something?
>
> > > > On Sep 15, 7:15 am, nadav s <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > if you don't want to use a DTO and prefere to use you're entity, you
> > wanna
> > > > > fully leaverage the lazy loading features, you can read thishttp://
> >www.codeproject.com/KB/library/StatefulEntityProxies.aspx
>
> > > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Dietrich <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > I learned it the hard way- use the unit of work pattern and
> > abstract
> > > > > > away all the concept of a session/transaction from the front end.
> > It
> > > > > > becomes quite a headache. There are a few UoW implementations out
> > > > > > there to look at. I would also advise the liberal use of the
> > > > > > repository pattern and having a rule for yourself never to touch th
> > > > > > hibernate namespace in form.
>
> > > > > > On Sep 14, 2:08 pm, pvginkel <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > I am writing a framework for a rewrite of an existing
> > application. We
> > > > > > > have a data model of around 900 tables with 11000 fields in total
> > and
> > > > > > > databases approaching 120 GB in the field. The basic elements of
> > my
> > > > > > > new implementation are WPF, NHibernate 3, C#, .NET 4.0,
> > > > > > > NHibernate.Validator and Spring. The application itself is very
> > data/
> > > > > > > transaction intensive and our largest installation has around 300
> > > > > > > concurrent users.
>
> > > > > > > A few things I would like feedback about are:
>
> > > > > > > * Is Spring a good choice? Why should I choose a different one
> > > > > > > (Castle?). I do have problems with startup time, but I have been
> > able
> > > > > > > to bring this back to around 14 seconds. I didn’t notice much
> > > > > > > difference between Spring and Castle though. Shorter startup
> > times are
> > > > > > > of course welcome;
>
> > > > > > > * I am using Identity fields, but understand this isn't the best
> > > > > > > option. What viable alternative is there (HiLo does not sound
> > like a
> > > > > > > good idea);
>
> > > > > > > * Data display is done with short sessions, one per query. Data
> > entry
> > > > > > > on the other hand has one session/transaction for the entire
> > duration
> > > > > > > of a workflow, which can take up to 10-20 minutes max (2-4
> > minutes is
> > > > > > > more usual). Are there alternatives to a session/transaction for
> > this
> > > > > > > entire duration and how could I set this up?
>
> > > > > > > I am open to all and every input and would like to integrate
> > ideas
> > > > > > > from people whom have been working longer, and have more
> > experience,
> > > > > > > with NHibernate than I have :).
>
> > > > > > > (B.t.w.: I know I’m in way over my head, but that’s the way I
> > prefer
> > > > > > > it.)
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups
> > > > > > "nhusers" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > [email protected]<nhusers%[email protected]
> > > > > >  >
> > <nhusers%[email protected]<nhusers%252bunsubscr...@googlegroup 
> > s.com>>
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "nhusers" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected]<nhusers%[email protected] 
> > >
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"nhusers" 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/nhusers?hl=en.

Reply via email to