>>COM+ is designed to prevent deadlocks and has a long history of doing
>>just that. It makes building a transactional application simple as
>>building a single user app.
Yes, but doesn't it do so by picking a lock victim and terminating the
victim's transaction? I thought that a developer shou
--- Ron Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Compose in any order? Sounds like a good way to get deadlocks.
> >I've found this, whilst a nice sounding idea, isn't very practical.
> >But it could just be me. ;-)
>
> COM+ is designed to prevent deadlocks and has a long history of doing
> just that.
L PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 4:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
--- Ron Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are many benefits that you get in return for a small performance
> cost.
Do you (or anyone else) have any performance data
wer but any code
that executes out of process would be slower.
-Original Message-
From: Knebels, Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 8:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
How do you resolve transactions that span multiple table cla
Peter,
this article give some performance info:
Performance Comparison: Transaction Control
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnbda/html/bdadotnetarch13.asp
You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.d
Robert,
During your deliberations, this may be of interest:
http://martinfowler.com/isa/
Cheers,
Duncan Smart
You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
--- Ron Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are many benefits that you get in return for a small performance
> cost.
Do you (or anyone else) have any performance data on relative costs?
1) COM+ DTC transactions
2) ADO.Net transactions
3) Stored procedure transactions
> What if you wanted t
Stonecash
>From: Ron Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: dotnet discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
>Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 13:33:11 -0700
>
>There are many benefits that you get in return for a small
, 2002 1:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
i guess the discussion was the inevitable loss of performance in moving
from
one RM based transaction (without DTS) to 1-or-more RM based
(distributed/2
way) transaction (under COM+ or whatever)
-Original Message
:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
I don't know why you think that COM+ is too slow. Extensive testing
shows that COM+ library applications are just as fast as any other .NET
class. Often people think that ServicedComponents must be in server
apps which ex
cutes out of process would be slower.
-Original Message-
From: Knebels, Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 8:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
How do you resolve transactions that span multiple table classes? Say a
registration
ms that COM+ transactions relieves this problem and gives me a
consistent way to write components.
Francis X. Knebels
Merck Vaccine Division
-Original Message-
From: Francesco Sanfilippo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 3:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET]
rom: "Knebels, Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: dotnet discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
>Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:31:11 -0400
>
>How do you resolve transactions that span multiple table cla
L PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
>Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 16:46:48 +
>
> Microsoft already provides a DAL with methos that rrturn
>DataReader, DataSet,
>Escalar, and so on. They call it DataAcess Application Block (DAAB).
>
>
>--
>That doesn't sound like business logic to me. Especially if there's a 1-1
>mapping between "business logic" classes and database tables.
>
True, my BLL (so far, since I'm working from the ground up, building this
thing from SCRATCH in .NET) is actually more of a secondary data layer
wrapped arou
> The whole 'changing the data store' gets me. I hear it a lot from OR
mapping people.
> How often are you realistically going to do this? Is it really worth the
effort?
> Bearing in mind switching enterprise class databases is a costly and
time-consuming
> affair even when you don't take into a
> --- "Sills, Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The goal of our abstracted data classes were to give us the
> ability, if
> > necessary (and I doubt it will ever be necessary), to
> rewrite the data layer
> > for any data source, and have the business layer not know
> the difference,
> > and to
--- "Sills, Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The goal of our abstracted data classes were to give us the ability, if
> necessary (and I doubt it will ever be necessary), to rewrite the data layer
> for any data source, and have the business layer not know the difference,
> and to provide very si
--- "Knebels, Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do you resolve transactions that span multiple table classes? Say a
> registration need to insert a person and a location if one doesn't exist.
> I've been reading the thread on "developing a middle tier" and from what I
> got is that you ca
Microsoft already provides a DAL with methos that rrturn DataReader, DataSet,
Escalar, and so on. They call it DataAcess Application Block (DAAB).
---
MAXIDROM-2002 ÕÖÅ ÂÌÉÚËÏ ...
÷ÓÔÒÅÞÁÅÍÓÑ × "ïÌÉÍÐÉÊÓËÏÍ" 19 ÍÁÑ !!!
http://r.mail.ru/cln1940/
use for.
It flies in the face of my Java friends who seem to want classes modelling
everything.
Graeme.
-Original Message-
From: Francesco Sanfilippo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 17 May 2002 16:20
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
I have built a DataAcc
May 2002 16:20
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
>
>
> I have built a DataAccess namespace which has the raw methods
> that touch SQL
> Server:
>
> ExecSPRetSC, ExecSPRetDT, ExecSPRetDS, ExecSPRetDR, etc.
>
> In my next level up, the B
servers).
Adam..
-Original Message-
From: Howard Pinsley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
>>None of our business objects have any notion of using SQL. Our DAL has
the
>>methods to do execute and
>>None of our business objects have any notion of using SQL. Our DAL has
the
>>methods to do execute and return the appropriate data.
And how is that data represented that is returned from the DAL to the BLL?
As a dataset or some other abstraction?
You can read messages from the DOTNET archive,
ED]]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
I have built a DataAccess namespace which has the raw methods that touch SQL
Server:
ExecSPRetSC, ExecSPRetDT, ExecSPRetDS, ExecSPRetDR, etc.
In my next level up, the BusinessLogic namespace
None of our business objects have any notion of using SQL. Our DAL has the
methods to do execute and return the appropriate data.
>From: "Rolls, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: dotnet discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: [DOTNET
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
>Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 14:21:20 +1000
>
>how many of you guys have raw SQL in the business Business Logic layer - or
>do you have coressponding functions in you Data Access Layer i.e
>
>UI->
-Tier Design
so your DAL has methods similar to your BLL returning Dataset?
-Original Message-
From: Dean Cleaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, 17 May 2002 14:40
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
I have my SQL all in the DAL - but no real "logic&
so your DAL has methods similar to your BLL returning Dataset?
-Original Message-
From: Dean Cleaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, 17 May 2002 14:40
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
I have my SQL all in the DAL - but no real "logic". Th
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [DOTNET] OT: N-Tier Design
how many of you guys have raw SQL in the business Business Logic layer -
or do you have coressponding functions in you Data Access Layer i.e
UI->onClick()->BBL->GetCustomers()->DAL->ExecuteQuery( SQL );
or
UI->onClick
how many of you guys have raw SQL in the business Business Logic layer - or
do you have coressponding functions in you Data Access Layer i.e
UI->onClick()->BBL->GetCustomers()->DAL->ExecuteQuery( SQL );
or
UI->onClick()->BBL->GetCustomers()->DAL->GetCustomers()
Regards,
Robert Rolls
***
31 matches
Mail list logo
