MBR IT/.NET 247 : stateless data access layer on ASPFriends.com 'aspngarchitecture' list

stateless data access layer

Messages

Related Types

This message was discovered on ASPFriends.com 'aspngarchitecture' list.
Responses highlighted in red are from those people who are likely to be able to contribute good, authoratitive information to this discussion. They include Microsoft employees, MVP's and others who IMHO contribute well to these kinds of discussions.

hemant mehta

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

Reply to this message...

James Shaw (VIP)

Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

Reply to this message...

Russ McClelland
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Reply to this message...

James Shaw (VIP)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0362_01C2437B.F10525C0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0363_01C2437B.F10525C0"

------=_NextPart_001_0363_01C2437B.F10525C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Isn=E2=80=99t thread safety usually only an issue when an object has =
state? Without state, how can an object be in an invalid state, and =
hence need to worry about thread safety?=20
=20
I admit that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning of =
my project, and happily created a few static stateless classes with =
barely a thought to thread safety. I=E2=80=99m very interested to hear =
more about this, because I instinctively thought that methods that (for =
example) simply called a stored procedure to do some work would not be a =
problem.=20
=20
I created static methods not to save the time taken to create an =
instance, but the memory needed. I thought until now that it would be =
MORE scaleable, not less.
=20
Russ, please give an example of how threads can cause problems in =
stateless classes=E2=80=A6
=20
James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/=20" target="_blank">http://CoverYourASP.com/=20
=C2=A0Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/=20
=C2=A0Publish ASP with RSS XML
=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Russ McClelland [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:44 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: RE: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer
=20
Definitely do NOT make those methods static. What would it buy you? A =
couple of micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with no data =
elements to initialize? Maybe. =20
=20
What's the trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you have to =
ensure that they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do make them =
thread safe, you now limit scalability because you have created a =
"singelton" type resource to access data and only one client can use the =
methods at a time.
=20
Static methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor common =
data access code (most of us have in one form or another I'm sure) =
static methods will limit the amount and strategies you use to factor =
code.
-----Original Message-----=20
From: James Shaw=20
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 AM=20
To: aspngarchitecture=20
Cc:=20
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer
Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes =
is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [ mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class =
is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some =
input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there =
are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the =
client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

the
> same app-domain. But I would like to know how much the fact that I'm =
using
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives

------=_NextPart_001_0363_01C2437B.F10525C0
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<html xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40";>

<head>
<meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8">
<meta name=3DProgId content=3DWord.Document>
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 9">
<meta name=3DOriginator content=3D"Microsoft Word 9">
<link rel=3DFile-List href=3D"cid:filelist.xml@01C2437B.F0BB4B80">
<title>[aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer</title>

<style>

</style>
</head>

<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dblue style=3D'tab-interval:.5in'>

<div class=3DSection1>

Is=
n=E2=80=99t
thread safety usually only an issue when an object has state? Without =
state,
how can an object be in an invalid state, and hence need to worry about =
thread
safety? <o:p></o:p>

<!=
[if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

I =
admit
that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning of my =
project,
and happily created a few static stateless classes with barely a thought =
to
thread safety. I=E2=80=99m very interested to hear more about this, =
because I
instinctively thought that methods that (for example) simply called a =
stored
procedure to do some work would not be a problem. =
<o:p></o:p>

<!=
[if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

I =
created
static methods not to save the time taken to create an instance, but the =
memory
needed. I thought until now that it would be MORE scaleable, not =
less.<o:p></o:p>

<!=
[if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

Ru=
ss,
please give an example of how threads can cause problems in stateless =
classes=E2=80=A6<o:p></o:p>

<!=
[if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

James Shaw<o:p></o:p>

<a =
href=3D"http://coveryourasp.com/";>http://CoverYourASP.com/</a> =
<o:p></o:p>

=C2=A0Download it. =
Run it. Learn
it.<o:p></o:p>=


<a href=3D"http://asprss.com/";>http://ASPRSS.com/</a> =
<o:p></o:p>

=C2=A0Publish
ASP with RSS XML<o:p></o:p>

<=
span
class=3DEmailStyle18><![if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

-----Original
Message----- 
From: Russ McClelland
[mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address] 
Sent: Wednesday, August =
14, 2002
9:44 AM 
To: aspngarchitecture 
Subject: RE: =
[aspngarchitecture]
RE: stateless data access layer

<![if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

Definitely do
NOT make those methods static. What would it buy you? A =
couple of
micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with no data elements to
initialize? Maybe. <o:p></o:p><=
/p>

 <o:p></o:p><=
/p>

What's the
trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you have to ensure =
that
they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do make them thread =
safe, you
now limit scalability because you have created a "singelton"
type resource to access data and only one client can use the =
methods at a
time.<o:p></o:p>

 <o:p></o:p><=
/p>

Static
methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor common data =
access
code (most of us have in one form or another I'm sure) static methods =
will
limit the amount and strategies you use to factor =
code.<o:p></o:p><=
/p>

-----Original Message----- 
From: James Shaw 
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 =
AM 
To: aspngarchitecture =
 
Cc: 
Subject: =
[aspngarchitecture] RE:
stateless data access layer<o:p></o:p><=
/p>

Definitely
make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes is 
pointless and wasteful. 
 
James Shaw 
<a href=3D"http://CoverYourASP.com/"" target="_blank">http://CoverYourASP.com/";>http://CoverYourASP.com/</a> 
Download it. Run it. Learn it. 
<a href=3D"http://ASPRSS.com/">http://ASPRSS.com/</a> 
Publish ASP with RSS XML 
 
-----Original Message----- 
From: hemant mehta [<a =
href=3D"mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address">mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address</a>] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM 
To: aspngarchitecture 
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer 
 
Hi All. 
 
If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class =
is 
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some =
input 
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there =
are no 
member fields), 
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the =
client 
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods??? 
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the =
client 
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce??? 
Don't know what r the pros and cons ??? 
 
any inputs would be highly appreciated... 
 
Thanx, 
Hemant 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address> 
To: "aspngarchitecture" =
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> 
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM 
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to =
another 
 
 
> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick =
Smits 
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> -- 
> 
> Greetings, 
> 
> BACKGROUND: 
> In my VS.NET solution, I got a ASP.NET Web Application (lets call =
it 
WebApp) 
> and a Class Library (ClassLib). In the WebApp, I have added a =
reference to 
> the ClassLib. My idea with the ClassLib was that it would be nice =
to have 
> the core logic separated from the WebApp as I might need to access =
this 
> logic from a Windows Form project later on. 
> As I compile my solution, both the WebApp dll and the ClassLib dll =
is 
placed 
> in the \bin directory of the WebApp. So they will definitely run =
within 
the 
> same app-domain. But I would like to know how much the fact that =
I'm using 
> two dlls changes things. 
> 
> NOTE: 
> There are many methods inside my ClassLib classes that returns 
> SqlDataReaders (this logic is copied from IBuySpy). 
> 
> QUESTION: 
> Will I loose the performance gain of my methods returning data =
readers 
since 
> I'm not passing them within the same dll? 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Thanks 
> 
> /Billy 
> | [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID 
> | <a =
href=3D"http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp"" target="_blank">http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp";>http://ww=
w.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp</a>
=3D JOIN/QUIT 
> | <a =
href=3D"http://www.asplists.com/search"" target="_blank">http://www.asplists.com/search";>http://www.asplists.com/search</a=
>
=3D SEARCH Archives 
> 
> 
 
 
 
| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID 
| <a =
href=3D"http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp"" target="_blank">http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp";>http://ww=
w.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp</a>
=3D JOIN/QUIT 
| <a =
href=3D"http://www.asplists.com/search"" target="_blank">http://www.asplists.com/search";>http://www.asplists.com/search</a=
> =3D
SEARCH Archives 
 
 
| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR =
ID 
| <a =
href=3D"http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp"" target="_blank">http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp";>http://ww=
w.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp</a>
=3D JOIN/QUIT 
| <a =
href=3D"http://www.asplists.com/search"" target="_blank">http://www.asplists.com/search";>http://www.asplists.com/search</a=
> =3D
SEARCH Archives<o:p></o:p>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------=_NextPart_001_0363_01C2437B.F10525C0--

------=_NextPart_000_0362_01C2437B.F10525C0
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef;
 name="winmail.dat"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="winmail.dat"
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------=_NextPart_000_0362_01C2437B.F10525C0--

Reply to this message...

Brian Espey

I agree that if you need to subclass in the future,
then you obviously can't use static methods if you
want polymorphic behavior, but absent that, I would
argue these methods should be static. He stated that
his objects are stateless, which suggests that his
methods are going to be inherently thread safe (it
sounds like everything he needs is passed in as a
parameter to his methods). Even if there is some
shared lookup table or something, that could be stored
as a private static member variable, that you either
initialize in the static constructor or wait until it
is needed to load, and just lock it with a mutex at
that point.

the value in making methods static isn't that it saves
you a few nanoseconds; instead it's that it
communicates more clearly the intended purpose. it
sounds like he's really just exposing some data access
services. why do you need an object instance to use
this service? requiring an instance suggests that the
instance has a unique "identity" and is somehow
different from other instances of the class, which
doesn't seem to be the case here.

Brian

--- Russ McClelland <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
wrote:
[Original message clipped]

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com

Reply to this message...

jimmy.nilsson@jnsk.se (Jimmy Nilsson)

[aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layerI'm a fan of using static methods, in situations when you don't have any instance state. I like to see it semantically. If it's natural with instance state, use instance state and ordinary methods. If not, use static methods.

If you don't have static state that is affected by the static methods, you don't have created a thread problem for you. And the "singleton" Russ mentioned won't automatically create blocking so I don't see the scalability problem there.

On the other hand, I agree with Russ about the problem that you can't override static methods. Another problem is that a static method can't be an endpoint for remoting.

Best Regards,
Jimmy
###

----- Original Message -----
From: James Shaw
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 4:18 PM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Isnâ€™t thread safety usually only an issue when an object has state? Without state, how can an object be in an invalid state, and hence need to worry about thread safety?

I admit that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning of my project, and happily created a few static stateless classes with barely a thought to thread safety. Iâ€™m very interested to hear more about this, because I instinctively thought that methods that (for example) simply called a stored procedure to do some work would not be a problem.

I created static methods not to save the time taken to create an instance, but the memory needed. I thought until now that it would be MORE scaleable, not less.

Russ, please give an example of how threads can cause problems in stateless classesâ€¦

James Shaw

http://CoverYourASP.com/

Download it. Run it. Learn it.

http://ASPRSS.com/

Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ McClelland [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:44 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: RE: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely do NOT make those methods static. What would it buy you? A couple of micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with no data elements to initialize? Maybe.

What's the trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you have to ensure that they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do make them thread safe, you now limit scalability because you have created a "singelton" type resource to access data and only one client can use the methods at a time.

Static methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor common data access code (most of us have in one form or another I'm sure) static methods will limit the amount and strategies you use to factor code.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Shaw
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Cc:
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

Reply to this message...

RRamirez@belcorporation.com

Microsoft uses static methods in his Data Access Application Block for =
.net
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=3D/library/en-us/dnbd=
a/html/daab-rm.asp

Rolando
Click here to reveal e-mail address
Click here to reveal e-mail address

BELCORP Peru
http://www.ebelinternational.com

Life after Napster =3D> http://www.winmx.com , http://www.trippymx.co.u=
k

=
=20
jimmy.nilsson =
=20
@jnsk.se Para: "aspngarchitecture" <a=
Click here to reveal e-mail address> =20
(Jimmy cc: =
=20
Nilsson) Asunto: [aspngarchitectur=
e] RE: stateless data access layer =20
=
=20
14/08/2002 =
=20
09:33 =
=20
Por favor, =
=20
responda a =
=20
"aspngarchite =
=20
cture" =
=20
=
=20
=
=20

I'm a fan of using static methods, in situations when you don't have an=
y
instance state. I like to see it semantically. If it's natural with
instance state, use instance state and ordinary methods. If not, use st=
atic
methods.

If you don't have static state that is affected by the static methods, =
you
don't have created a thread problem for you. And the "singleton" Russ
mentioned won't automatically create blocking so I don't see the
scalability problem there.

On the other hand, I agree with Russ about the problem that you can't
override static methods. Another problem is that a static method can't =
be
an endpoint for remoting.

Best Regards,
Jimmy
###

----- Original Message -----
From: James Shaw
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 4:18 PM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Isn't thread safety usually only an issue when an object has state?
Without state, how can an object be in an invalid state, and hence nee=
d to
worry about thread safety?

I admit that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning =
of
my project, and happily created a few static stateless classes with ba=
rely
a thought to thread safety. I'm very interested to hear more about thi=
s,
because I instinctively thought that methods that (for example) simply=

called a stored procedure to do some work would not be a problem.

I created static methods not to save the time taken to create an insta=
nce,
but the memory needed. I thought until now that it would be MORE
scaleable, not less.

Russ, please give an example of how threads can cause problems in
stateless classes?

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ McClelland [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:44 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: RE: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely do NOT make those methods static. What would it buy y=
ou?
A couple of micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with n=
o
data elements to initialize? Maybe.

What's the trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you h=
ave
to ensure that they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do mak=
e
them thread safe, you now limit scalability because you have crea=
ted
a "singelton" type resource to access data and only one client ca=
n
use the methods at a time.

Static methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor=

common data access code (most of us have in one form or another I=
'm
sure) static methods will limit the amount and strategies you use=
to
factor code.
-----Original Message-----
From: James Shaw
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Cc:
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer=

Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of th=
ose
classes is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sens=
e
each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just tak=
es
some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p
parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that=
the
client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods??=
?
or is it that even though the class is just a function libra=
ry ,
the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dl=
l to
another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yan=
nick
Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

call it
WebApp)
> and a Class Library (ClassLib). In the WebApp, I have adde=
d a
reference to
> the ClassLib. My idea with the ClassLib was that it would =
be
nice to have
> the core logic separated from the WebApp as I might need t=
o
access this
[Original message clipped]

dll is
placed
> in the \bin directory of the WebApp. So they will definite=
ly
run within
the
> same app-domain. But I would like to know how much the fac=
t
that I'm using
[Original message clipped]

readers
since
[Original message clipped]

JOIN/QUIT
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR I=
D
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp =3D=

JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D=

YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp =3D=

JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT=

| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives

=

Reply to this message...

Martin Garins

I would like to add on to this question.

Would one choice change if you were to put this assembly into COM+?

I don't want to get into the pros and cons of using COM+. Just how using
COM+ would change ones decision to mark the methods as STATIC or not.

Thanks,

Martin Garins

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Espey [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]=20
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:23 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

I agree that if you need to subclass in the future,
then you obviously can't use static methods if you
want polymorphic behavior, but absent that, I would
argue these methods should be static. He stated that
his objects are stateless, which suggests that his
methods are going to be inherently thread safe (it
sounds like everything he needs is passed in as a
parameter to his methods). Even if there is some
shared lookup table or something, that could be stored
as a private static member variable, that you either
initialize in the static constructor or wait until it
is needed to load, and just lock it with a mutex at
that point. =20

the value in making methods static isn't that it saves
you a few nanoseconds; instead it's that it
communicates more clearly the intended purpose. it
sounds like he's really just exposing some data access services. why do
you need an object instance to use this service? requiring an instance
suggests that the instance has a unique "identity" and is somehow
different from other instances of the class, which doesn't seem to be
the case here.

Brian
=20
--- Russ McClelland <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
wrote:
[Original message clipped]

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address =3D YOUR ID=20
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp =3D JOIN/QUIT=20
| http://www.asplists.com/search =3D SEARCH Archives

Reply to this message...

dave wanta (VIP)

[aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layerI'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this concept. Although I can accept that a static method (without the need for state ) will be faster. But let's take this data access method. With a static method, only 1 instance of it exists. So if only 1 instance exists, then aren't all calls made to that instance serializing? What am i missing here..?

If I have a static method called GetDataTable(string sqlQuery ) and lets say it take 5min to process that query, is that thread blocked for 5min until that query is done executing? surely not?!? Then how do static methods really work, if there is only 1 instance of them?

Thanks,
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: James Shaw
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:18 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Isnâ€™t thread safety usually only an issue when an object has state? Without state, how can an object be in an invalid state, and hence need to worry about thread safety?

I admit that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning of my project, and happily created a few static stateless classes with barely a thought to thread safety. Iâ€™m very interested to hear more about this, because I instinctively thought that methods that (for example) simply called a stored procedure to do some work would not be a problem.

I created static methods not to save the time taken to create an instance, but the memory needed. I thought until now that it would be MORE scaleable, not less.

Russ, please give an example of how threads can cause problems in stateless classesâ€¦

James Shaw

http://CoverYourASP.com/

Download it. Run it. Learn it.

http://ASPRSS.com/

Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ McClelland [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:44 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: RE: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely do NOT make those methods static. What would it buy you? A couple of micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with no data elements to initialize? Maybe.

What's the trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you have to ensure that they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do make them thread safe, you now limit scalability because you have created a "singelton" type resource to access data and only one client can use the methods at a time.

Static methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor common data access code (most of us have in one form or another I'm sure) static methods will limit the amount and strategies you use to factor code.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Shaw
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Cc:
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

Reply to this message...

Steven A Smith (VIP)

[aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layerNo, they are not serialized. I have a simple command line example that Mac Kloberg and I came up with about a year ago that demonstrates this if you'd like to see for yourself. Basically, the method is just a series of instructions in memory somewhere, and the parameters are on the stack. There's no reason why several threads can't be going through the same series of instructions in the same memory block each with their own values on the stack.

Steve

----- Original Message -----
From: dave wanta
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 10:49 PM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this concept. Although I can accept that a static method (without the need for state ) will be faster. But let's take this data access method. With a static method, only 1 instance of it exists. So if only 1 instance exists, then aren't all calls made to that instance serializing? What am i missing here..?

If I have a static method called GetDataTable(string sqlQuery ) and lets say it take 5min to process that query, is that thread blocked for 5min until that query is done executing? surely not?!? Then how do static methods really work, if there is only 1 instance of them?

Thanks,
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: James Shaw
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:18 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Isnâ€™t thread safety usually only an issue when an object has state? Without state, how can an object be in an invalid state, and hence need to worry about thread safety?

I admit that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning of my project, and happily created a few static stateless classes with barely a thought to thread safety. Iâ€™m very interested to hear more about this, because I instinctively thought that methods that (for example) simply called a stored procedure to do some work would not be a problem.

I created static methods not to save the time taken to create an instance, but the memory needed. I thought until now that it would be MORE scaleable, not less.

Russ, please give an example of how threads can cause problems in stateless classesâ€¦

James Shaw

http://CoverYourASP.com/

Download it. Run it. Learn it.

http://ASPRSS.com/

Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ McClelland [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:44 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: RE: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely do NOT make those methods static. What would it buy you? A couple of micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with no data elements to initialize? Maybe.

What's the trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you have to ensure that they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do make them thread safe, you now limit scalability because you have created a "singelton" type resource to access data and only one client can use the methods at a time.

Static methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor common data access code (most of us have in one form or another I'm sure) static methods will limit the amount and strategies you use to factor code.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Shaw
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Cc:
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

Reply to this message...

Steven A Smith (VIP)

[aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layerActually, it was Mitch Denny who wrote the code, and I put it online at
http://www.aspalliance.com/stevesmith/articles/staticthreads.asp

:)

Forgot about that.

Steve

----- Original Message -----
From: Steven A Smith
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 12:36 PM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

No, they are not serialized. I have a simple command line example that Mac Kloberg and I came up with about a year ago that demonstrates this if you'd like to see for yourself. Basically, the method is just a series of instructions in memory somewhere, and the parameters are on the stack. There's no reason why several threads can't be going through the same series of instructions in the same memory block each with their own values on the stack.

Steve

----- Original Message -----
From: dave wanta
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 10:49 PM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this concept. Although I can accept that a static method (without the need for state ) will be faster. But let's take this data access method. With a static method, only 1 instance of it exists. So if only 1 instance exists, then aren't all calls made to that instance serializing? What am i missing here..?

If I have a static method called GetDataTable(string sqlQuery ) and lets say it take 5min to process that query, is that thread blocked for 5min until that query is done executing? surely not?!? Then how do static methods really work, if there is only 1 instance of them?

Thanks,
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: James Shaw
To: aspngarchitecture
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:18 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Isnâ€™t thread safety usually only an issue when an object has state? Without state, how can an object be in an invalid state, and hence need to worry about thread safety?

I admit that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning of my project, and happily created a few static stateless classes with barely a thought to thread safety. Iâ€™m very interested to hear more about this, because I instinctively thought that methods that (for example) simply called a stored procedure to do some work would not be a problem.

I created static methods not to save the time taken to create an instance, but the memory needed. I thought until now that it would be MORE scaleable, not less.

Russ, please give an example of how threads can cause problems in stateless classesâ€¦

James Shaw

http://CoverYourASP.com/

Download it. Run it. Learn it.

http://ASPRSS.com/

Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ McClelland [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:44 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: RE: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely do NOT make those methods static. What would it buy you? A couple of micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with no data elements to initialize? Maybe.

What's the trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you have to ensure that they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do make them thread safe, you now limit scalability because you have created a "singelton" type resource to access data and only one client can use the methods at a time.

Static methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor common data access code (most of us have in one form or another I'm sure) static methods will limit the amount and strategies you use to factor code.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Shaw
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Cc:
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

Reply to this message...

Bryan Costanich

Remember, the only difference between a static and an instance method is
that with an instance method there is a hidden parameter that passes a
reference to the object. Calls are not serialized either way.

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven A Smith [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 12:37 PM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Actually, it was Mitch Denny who wrote the code, and I put it online at

http://www.aspalliance.com/stevesmith/articles/staticthreads.asp
<http://www.aspalliance.com/stevesmith/articles/staticthreads.asp>

:)

Forgot about that.

Steve

----- Original Message -----

From: Steven A <mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address> Smith

To: aspngarchitecture <mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address>

Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 12:36 PM

Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

No, they are not serialized. I have a simple command line example that Mac
Kloberg and I came up with about a year ago that demonstrates this if you'd
like to see for yourself. Basically, the method is just a series of
instructions in memory somewhere, and the parameters are on the stack.
There's no reason why several threads can't be going through the same series
of instructions in the same memory block each with their own values on the
stack.

Steve

----- Original Message -----

From: dave wanta <mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address>

To: aspngarchitecture <mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address>

Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 10:49 PM

Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this concept. Although I can
accept that a static method (without the need for state ) will be faster.
But let's take this data access method. With a static method, only 1
instance of it exists. So if only 1 instance exists, then aren't all calls
made to that instance serializing? What am i missing here..?

If I have a static method called GetDataTable(string sqlQuery ) and lets
say it take 5min to process that query, is that thread blocked for 5min
until that query is done executing? surely not?!? Then how do static
methods really work, if there is only 1 instance of them?

Thanks,

Dave

----- Original Message -----

From: James Shaw <mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address>

To: aspngarchitecture <mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address>

Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:18 AM

Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Isn't thread safety usually only an issue when an object has state? Without
state, how can an object be in an invalid state, and hence need to worry
about thread safety?

I admit that I only thought about this issue quickly at the beginning of my
project, and happily created a few static stateless classes with barely a
thought to thread safety. I'm very interested to hear more about this,
because I instinctively thought that methods that (for example) simply
called a stored procedure to do some work would not be a problem.

I created static methods not to save the time taken to create an instance,
but the memory needed. I thought until now that it would be MORE scaleable,
not less.

Russ, please give an example of how threads can cause problems in stateless
classes...

James Shaw

http://CoverYourASP.com/ <http://coveryourasp.com/>

Download it. Run it. Learn it.

http://ASPRSS.com/ <http://asprss.com/>

Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: Russ McClelland [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:44 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: RE: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely do NOT make those methods static. What would it buy you? A
couple of micro-seconds to create an instance of a class with no data
elements to initialize? Maybe.

What's the trade-off? If you make all your methods static, you have to
ensure that they are thread safe. Additionally, if you do make them thread
safe, you now limit scalability because you have created a "singelton" type
resource to access data and only one client can use the methods at a time.

Static methods cannot be virtual either, so if you want to factor common
data access code (most of us have in one form or another I'm sure) static
methods will limit the amount and strategies you use to factor code.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Shaw
Sent: Wed 8/14/2002 7:11 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Cc:
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] RE: stateless data access layer

Definitely make all methods static. Creating instances of those classes is
pointless and wasteful.

James Shaw
http://CoverYourASP.com/ <http://CoverYourASP.com/>
Download it. Run it. Learn it.
http://ASPRSS.com/ <http://ASPRSS.com/>
Publish ASP with RSS XML

-----Original Message-----
From: hemant mehta [mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address <mailto:Click here to reveal e-mail address> ]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:47 AM
To: aspngarchitecture
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] stateless data access layer

Hi All.

If my data access layer is completely stateless (in the sense each class is
nothing but a group of methods where in each method just takes some input
paramters and returns the required values via o/p parameters....there are no
member fields),
does it make sense to mark all the methods as static so that the client
doesn't need to create instance for accesssing the methods???
or is it that even though the class is just a function library , the client
should be calling the methods thru an insatnce???
Don't know what r the pros and cons ???

any inputs would be highly appreciated...

Thanx,
Hemant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy Porter" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
To: "aspngarchitecture" <Click here to reveal e-mail address>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:42 AM
Subject: [aspngarchitecture] Passing datareaders from one dll to another

> -- Moved from [aspngibuyspy] to [aspngarchitecture] by Yannick Smits
<Click here to reveal e-mail address> --
[Original message clipped]

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp
<http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp> = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search <http://www.asplists.com/search> = SEARCH
Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp
<http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp> = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search <http://www.asplists.com/search> = SEARCH
Archives

_____

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

| [aspngarchitecture] member Click here to reveal e-mail address = YOUR ID
| http://www.asplists.com/asplists/aspngarchitecture.asp = JOIN/QUIT
| http://www.asplists.com/search = SEARCH Archives

Reply to this message...

MBR BootFX
Best-of-breed application framework for .NET projects, developed by Matthew Baxter-Reynolds and MBR IT

	Copyright © Matthew Baxter-Reynolds 2001-2008. '.NET 247 Software Development Services' is a trading style of MBR IT Solutions Ltd.
	Contact Us - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - www.dotnet247.com