Pete, you are correct in enterpreting what I was trying to
say. But you
didn't solve my problem <grin>. While this is a
little example, let's say
I have a hundred classes that are abstracted the same way.
If each makes
its own call to the database, that would be terrible.
You diagramed the classes perfectly below.
Is there maybe a better way to do this architecturally? Ie,
possibly have
different class that gets all the data in a logical fashion
from the db and
then each of these classes request information from the
objects in memory??
I'm assuming it would have to be a dataset since the reader
would need to
stay connected.
As you mentioned, I'm trying to find a best practices or
balance between
maintainability and performance. (Steven suggests correct
or maintainable
is the top priority... I struggle with this because my
background is on the
database side and I want performance) I want the cake
<grin>
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-aspnet-databases-58376 aspadvice.com
[mailto:bounce-aspnet-databases-58376aspadvice.com] On Behalf Of
Peter
O'Hanlon
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:15 AM
To: aspnet-databasesaspadvice.com
Subject: [aspnet-databases] RE: Objects versus performance
It looks as though Bill is stating that the classes inherit,
rather than
implement. So you would have something like:
public class User : Person
{
public virtual DataSet GetData()
{
DataSet ds = GetSomeData();
}
}
public class Person : IRole
{
public virtual DataSet GetData()
{
DataSet ds = GetSomeData();
}
}
public class IRole
{
public virtual DataSet GetData()
{
DataSet ds = GetSomeData();
}
}
Now, if the classes each implement DB routines, then they
are not going to
be as efficient as if this was handled in one go. This would
be three
separate accesses. One call would be more efficient, but you
have to ask
yourself if the efficiency is more important than
maintainability. That's a
call that only you can make.
You need to ask yourself what the usage is going to be like.
Is any of the
data going to be cached? Is this going to be heavily hit?
Sometimes you can
use a bit of cleverness to get round performance issues.
Sorry if that's not as much help as you want, but hopefully
that will give
you some food for thought.
Regards,
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Mehner [mailto:paulsoundex.com]
Sent: 14 September 2006 00:48
To: aspnet-databasesaspadvice.com
Subject: [aspnet-databases] RE: Objects versus performance
Tim Curtin [mailto:tjc_tekhotmail.com] said:
Incidently, C# and VB only support single inheritance.
So, Security inherits User
User inherits Person
>User inherits IRole *** NOT SUPPORTED
Just to offer a couple of clarifying points: normally the
letter "I" (as in
IRole) denotes an interface and not a class. Although the
CLR only allows
single inheritence, an object can implement any number of
interfaces. While
I understand your point, when I read this thread, I assumed
that poster
intended to say that User class implements IRole (because of
the "I"). If my
interpretation of his post was correct, this would mean that
User would
inherit from Person and also implement the IUser interface
(which would be
perfectly legal).
Of course in C# syntax, Implements and Inherits are written
the same way
(using a colon). I prefer the C# syntax, but to some, the VB
syntax makes
the distinction clearer. But suddenly I find myself
digressing....
Cheers!
--Paul Mehner
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Curtin [mailto:tjc_tekhotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 9:34 AM
To: aspnet-databasesaspadvice.com
Subject: [aspnet-databases] RE: Objects versus performance
Incidently, C# and VB only support single inheritance.
So,
Security inherits User
User inherits Person
>User inherits IRole *** NOT SUPPORTED
Replace with Person Inherits from IRole.
Put the validation or DBcode in IRole, that way it will be
inherited up the
heep
>From: "Steven Archibald"
<steven.archibaldsa-consult.com>
>Reply-To: aspnet-databasesaspadvice.com
>To: aspnet-databasesaspadvice.com
>Subject: [aspnet-databases] RE: Objects versus
performance
>Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 23:34:47 -0700
>
>Well, after 30 years of development experience:
>
>If something is correct but slow, I can always make it
faster. If something
>is fast, but incorrect, it's almost impossible to make
it "correcter".
>
>Presumably the 3 reads will be done once per session;
when the user first
>signs on. After that, it would make sense to store the
Security object in
>Session. You don't need to read it on every page load.
Assuming a session
>with a user last 10 minutes, your relative difference
per user is 3 reads
>per 10 minutes vs. 1 read per 10 minutes for the
Security object. Seems
>like
>a very small difference ...
>
>If your Security object has 3 reads, why not have it do
them and return 1
>dataset with 3 tables? It doesn't save the reads, but
it does save some
>overhead on instantiating datasets, etc.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bill Swartz [mailto:bswartzbubbyzone.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 9:56 PM
>To: aspnet-databasesaspadvice.com
>Subject: [aspnet-databases] Objects versus performance
>
>I'm designing a complex web application that has a
number of classes. I'm
>using Sparx Enterprise Architect tool. When sit back
and look at the
>classes, I'm asking myself if I'm not trading
"correct object design" for
>performance.
>
>For example.
>Security inherits User
>User inherits Person
>User inherits IRole
>
>Now, because these are all classes, they are independent
and are going to
>make 3 separate calls to a database versus if I lumped
everything together
>into one class, I could more efficiently make 1 call to
the database and
>return 3 sets.
>
>Any experience / thoughts on this subject.
>
>Thanks
>Bill
>
>
>
>Need SQL Advice? http://sqladvice.com
>Need RegEx Advice? http://regexadvice.com
Need XML Advice?
>http://xmladvice.com
>
>
>Need SQL Advice? http://sqladvice.com
>Need RegEx Advice? http://regexadvice.com
>Need XML Advice? http://xmladvice.com
Need SQL Advice? http://sqladvice.com
Need RegEx Advice? http://regexadvice.com
Need XML Advice? http://xmladvice.com
Need SQL Advice? http://sqladvice.com
Need RegEx Advice? http://regexadvice.com
Need XML Advice? http://xmladvice.com
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.3/446 - Release
Date: 12/09/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.3/446 - Release
Date: 12/09/2006
Need SQL Advice? http://sqladvice.com
Need RegEx Advice? http://regexadvice.com
Need XML Advice? http://xmladvice.com
Need SQL Advice? http://sqladvice.com
Need RegEx Advice? http://regexadvice.com
Need XML Advice? http://xmladvice.com
|