Re: How to handle concurrency issue with better performance?
- From: "William \(Bill\) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveThis@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:26:42 -0700
This question has been asked (and answered) many, many times here and in my
(and other's) books over the years.
The CommandBuilder (CB) is a mechanism with many limitations. As you have
found, it fails to deal with more sophisticated designs--all too often, even
those as simple as yours. Yes, many developers have migrated to stored
procedures which use TimeStamps to monitor concurrency--this approach is far
faster and easier to code. The newest CB also uses this approach as well
(ADO.NET 2.0 and VS2005).
As I describe in my latest book (if I may be so bold to mention it again),
the real solution is often in the design of the application and the way it
accesses data. Collisions occur because your design permits more than one
application (even the same application) to access the same row at the same
time--where both applications try to change the row. This is like designing
traffic intersections without signals and worrying about where to put the
ambulances and fire trucks to deal with the collisions. We all work with
relational database designs and more importantly DBAs that don't expose the
base table for a litany of reasons. Creating applications that party down on
these base tables is a plan for disaster. One morning you'll wake up with a
terrible security headache that can't be cured with a glass of tomato juice
and a raw egg.
--
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book:
Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition)
and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"cherry" <cherryparadise001@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1174529058.747242.168860@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I am now thinking a method to handle the concurrency issue in my
program.
In .Net, the Command Builder Class will generate SQL automatically in
which it compares all the fields' original version with the version in
database as the update criteria and thus avoid overwriting others'
data.
In my case, I have a dataset retrieving data from joining several
tables and thus encounter error when use the DataSet.Update() method
of adapter directly.(cannot generate sql coz more 1 table in the
select command).
Therefore, I create stored procedure for the update command and assign
them to the dataset so that it can do the update. However, using the
concept of commandbuilder to handle concurrency issue, I have to
passing all the fields' original version to the stored procedure as
the where conditiion, the number of parameters might rise to about 30
to 40.
Will the preformance (esp. client) downgrade very much in using such
update method?
I was suggested by colleague to use 2 datasets, one is that I am using
right now and another will act as a image, storing the only table
which will be updated. So that when saving data to the database, I can
use the image DataSet's Update Command directly and needn't pass so
many parameters. But it seems that the synchonization between these 2
dataset is quite troublesome!
How you guys think? Which is better? or there is some better solution
which I may not know?
I am using VS.Net 2003 Enterprise to do the development, language is
VB .Net and the Database is Oracle 10g.
People using the application ~10-20, not a big number but the
performance of application must be as fast as possible due to the
business requirement.
Thanks in advanced.
Regards,
Cherry
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: My Book is Incomplete Regarding SQL Commands ;-(
- Next by Date: Re: How to handle concurrency issue with better performance?
- Previous by thread: Re: How to handle concurrency issue with better performance?
- Next by thread: Re: How to handle concurrency issue with better performance?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
