pretty sure he meant stateful, as the services would be transient.
On Sep 22, 4:38 pm, Simone Busoli <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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 Or I'll get an instance of the component with an out of date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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
