Do I read correctly or did you mean stateless?

2009/9/22, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>:
> The most important one, it could be stateful.
> I like stateful components, they are much easier to work with
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Jason Meckley
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>> Oren, could you share an example of how a transient service would
>> benefit, rather than a singleton? For example I don't see how managing
>> cache would be effected by the lifestyletype of the service.
>>
>> On Sep 21, 6:50 pm, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > There is a reason that I like to depend directly on ISession, and make
>> > my
>> > services transient.
>> > It allows me to make assumptions with things like the session cache,
>> > uniqueness, etc.
>> > With UoW.Current or interceptor approach, that is not the case.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:47 PM, Simone Busoli <[email protected]
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks Jason, I see it now, and it's an interesting approach, I never
>> used
>> > > it though. At the moment I am just doing UoW.Current when I need
>> > > access
>> to
>> > > the UoW, but having a decorator which gives me the current one and
>> still
>> > > have it in the constructor is a nice way to accomplish that.
>> >
>> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 22:37, Jason Meckley <[email protected]
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> > >> this is what I like about the SessionAdapter object I posted above.
>> > >> you can use the default lifestyle of singleton. the actual session is
>> > >> not retrieved (from the current session context) until you call a
>> > >> member of session.
>> >
>> > >> On Sep 21, 3:20 pm, Simone Busoli <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >> > I'm not sure I follow you, if I have a component which takes an
>> > >> > ISession as a ctor argument, I need to be careful to configure its
>> > >> > lifestyle to be "more transient" than that of the session itself,
>> > >> > right? Or I'll get an instance of the component with an out of date
>> > >> > session.
>> >
>> > >> > 2009/9/21, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>:
>> >
>> > >> > > Simone,
>> > >> > > *shrug*, the provide an ISession implementation that will access
>> the
>> > >> ambient
>> > >> > > session.
>> >
>> > >> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Simone Busoli
>> > >> > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>> >
>> > >> > >> That's what I don't like much with this approach, it's easy to
>> > >> > >> do
>> > >> > >> something wrong, because you need to be very careful about the
>> > >> > >> lifestyle of your components, or you'll get into weird
>> situations.
>> > >> > >> Ideally, I wouldn't like my components to be sort of aware of
>> > >> > >> the
>> > >> > >> lifestyle of something they depend on, or, put in other words,
>> I'd
>> > >> > >> expect them to get the right UoW regardless of whether they are
>> > >> > >> transient or singleton.
>> >
>> > >> > >> 2009/9/21, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>:
>> > >> > >> > yes
>> >
>> > >> > >> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Martin Nilsson <
>> > >> [email protected]>
>> > >> > >> wrote:
>> >
>> > >> > >> >> Yes, that was the case. Thanks.
>> > >> > >> >> My other question regarding taking ISession as a ctor
>> argument.
>> > >> Then
>> > >> > >> >> all
>> > >> > >> >> those classes (queryobject, service and repository) needs to
>> be
>> > >> > >> transient?
>> >
>> > >> > >> >> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Ayende Rahien <
>> > >> [email protected]>
>> > >> > >> wrote:
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>> You need to register the factory facility.
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Martin Nilsson
>> > >> > >> >>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>> Ok ok :)
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>> I changed to this instead:
>> >
>> > >>
>> Kernel.Register(Component.For<ISession>().LifeStyle.Transient.UsingFactoryMethod(()
>> > >> > >> >>>> => Kernel.Resolve<ISessionFactory>().GetCurrentSession()));
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>> but then I get error:
>> > >> > >> >>>> "Type NHibernate.ISession is abstract.
>> > >> > >> >>>> As such, it is not possible to instansiate it as
>> implementation
>> > >> of
>> > >> > >> >>>> NHibernate.ISession service"
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>> My solution now is this (not causing the above error):
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>> ServiceClass:
>> > >> > >> >>>>   ctor(IUnitOfWorkFactory unitOfWorkFactory)
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>>   In ServiceMethod:
>> > >> > >> >>>>     var session = unitOfWorkFactory.CurrentSession;
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>> Questions:
>> > >> > >> >>>> 1. Anyone knows why I get the above error?
>> > >> > >> >>>> 2. Is my other solution (using IUnitOfWorkFactory)
>> > >> > >> >>>> better/ok
>> > >> then?
>> > >> > >> >>>> 3. You say that it's possible (better?) to take the
>> > >> > >> >>>> ISession
>> as
>> > >> a
>> > >> > >> >>>> ctor
>> > >> > >> >>>> arg. Will that be a different one for each req if my
>> > >> > >> >>>> service
>> > >> class is
>> > >> > >> >>>> singleton, although my session registration is transient?
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Ayende Rahien <
>> > >> [email protected]
>> > >> > >> >wrote:
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>>> This is HORRIBLE.
>> > >> > >> >>>>> You micro manage the session and remove from NH things
>> > >> > >> >>>>> like
>> > >> UoW,
>> > >> > >> >>>>> auto
>> > >> > >> >>>>> change tracking, persistence by reachability, etc.
>> > >> > >> >>>>> Sessions should be managed by request / context, not in
>> > >> methods.
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Martin Nilsson
>> > >> > >> >>>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>> >
>> > >> > >> >>>>>> ProductService:
>> > >> > >> >>>>>> public void Save(Product product) {
>> > >> > >> >>>>>>   using(var session = ?.GetSession)
>> > >> > >> >>>>>>   using(var tx = session.BeginTransaction())
>> > >> > >> >>>>>>   {
>> > >> > >> >>>>>>     repository.Add(product);
>> > >> > >> >>>>>>     tx.Commit();
>> > >> > >> >>>>>>   }
>> > >> > >> >>>>>> }
>> >
>> > >> > >> --
>> > >> > >> Inviato dal mio dispositivo mobile
>> >
>> > >> > --
>> > >> > Inviato dal mio dispositivo mobile
>> >
>>
>
> >
>

-- 
Inviato dal mio dispositivo mobile

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Rhino Tools Dev" 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/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to