I've just had a quick look at Massive and Dapper.. Both appear to use the MS.Net 4.0 System.Dynamic namespace to do their "dirty" work.. Looks powerful.. MSDN Mag had an article on this not so long ago, was a good read and looks very powerful.
Massive looks like it's basically attaching the DAL layer to every entity. Is this assumption correct ?? What's people opinion on doing this ?? It seams to go against the theory of n-tier dev if the db connection is within the entity object. Is this what people are doing ? On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Michael Minutillo < [email protected]> wrote: > Have you looked at https://github.com/robconery/massive > > <https://github.com/robconery/massive>This seems to fit what the OP was > after. It is just a way to translate SQL <=> C# dynamic. I haven't used it. > StackOverflow does something similar for some of it's hardcore optimization > stuff but I can't recall what they're library is called > > > On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Mark Ryall <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm confused. >> >> Do we agree on what is meant by 'runtime'? >> >> It sounds like you're both referring to compile time code generation of >> static types. >> >> I thought the original question was relating to orm implementations that >> can detect and cope with schema changes without the need to deploy a new >> version of your application. >> >> Apologies if I've misunderstood. >> >> On 08/05/2011, at 6:24 PM, Nathan Schultz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> My solution can create classes based on the LINQ2SQL active records, and >> CRUD <http://ASP.NET>ASP.NET screens for those. I only really use it for >> Admin / Reference screens though, since your object model and database >> schema are often fundamentally at odds (since they [should] represent >> different things). >> >> As for Grant's Stored Proc idea - my old code template schema's did a >> similar thing - and it is slightly faster, and there are security advantages >> (individual stored procs can be given different rights). But I'm hooked to >> the flexibility that LINQ provides, and the bells and whistles like lazy >> loading. >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Grant Molloy < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Performance nat an issue.. Test harness proves its quicker than linq >>> for same query (single and multi record). it also returns multi >>> resultsets with good speed too. 10 result sets from 1 stored proc in >>> 20 millisecs. >>> >>> On 5/8/11, Mark Ryall < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > I've heard of a few projects that needed to do something like this >>> (mingle >>> > is one that comes to mind) where the structure of your entities can be >>> > modified at runtime. It gets really complicated very quickly - >>> especially >>> > in getting the implementation to perform adequately. >>> > >>> > This seems a better fit for a non relational database such as mongodb, >>> > ravendb, couchdb etc. if that's an available option. >>> > >>> > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Anthony < <[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Anyone aware of a dynamic orm software. Been using llblgen for years >>> and >>> >> finding the need for a dynamic orm. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I find that some database create custom fields etc at runtime which do >>> not >>> >> become visible to the ORM until I re-apply the ORM schema. If I >>> >> re-apply >>> >> orm to a db with customer fields, then it makes the orm code >>> specific to >>> >> one environment…. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> regards >>> >> >>> >> Anthony (*12QWERNB*) >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from my mobile device >>> >> >> >
