|
dev
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Performance of sqlDataReader.Close() is very bad?Datareader dr = Datareader on (Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid from Items where ItemName = something) while dr.read { read and assign values if LotValid = false; break; } dr.close(); The issue arises when the number of records fetched by the query is high and the LotValid boolean is false very soon. Even when I call dr.Close(), it goes through the entire QuerySet and skips each row individually. This hits the overall performance of the method very badly. Above mentioned code is just a sample scenario and optimisations like putting the LotValid logic in the StoredProcedure cannot be done. I think your code is invalid.
Show quote > if LotValid = false; //<< This is an assignment not an equality test Show quote> while dr.read > { > read and assign values > if LotValid = false; > break; > } > dr.close(); "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:7B480F8A-C3CC-42EA-8D1C-B66B6556AF9E@microsoft.com... >I have a piece of code which goes like this. > > Datareader dr = Datareader on (Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid from > Items where ItemName = something) > while dr.read > { > read and assign values > if LotValid = false; > break; > } > dr.close(); > > The issue arises when the number of records fetched by the query is high > and > the LotValid boolean is false very soon. > Even when I call dr.Close(), it goes through the entire QuerySet and skips > each row individually. This hits the overall performance of the method > very > badly. > Above mentioned code is just a sample scenario and optimisations like > putting the LotValid logic in the StoredProcedure cannot be done. You are right, It would be syntactically wrong, I was trying to get the
pseudo code across for easy reading. The code would look like SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid from Items where ItemName = something"); //Lets say the query returne 10000 rows SqlDataReader dr = cmd.ExecuteReader(); while (dr.Read()) { //read and assign all values from datareader- skipped here if (dr["LotValid"] == "false")//Lets say his condition comes true for the 50th row break; } dr.Close(); --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Show quote "OHM ( One Handed Man )" wrote: > I think your code is invalid. > > > if LotValid = false; //<< This is an assignment not an equality test > > > while dr.read > > { > > read and assign values > > if LotValid = false; > > break; > > } > > dr.close(); > > > -- > ( OHM ) - One Handed Man > AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net I created 10,000 records and wrote this code in vb.net to emulate what you
did, it worked fine and terminates properly at 50 items. Dim conString As String = "Server=LOUNGE;Database=TEST;Trusted_Connection=True;" Dim sqlString As String = "SELECT * FROM [Test];" Dim con As New Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection(conString) Dim sqlCommand As New Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand(sqlString, con) Dim rdr As Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader Try con.Open() rdr = sqlCommand.ExecuteReader Dim x As Int16 = 0 While rdr.Read() Response.Write(rdr(0).ToString & "<BR>") If x > 50 Then Exit While x += 1 End While rdr.Close() Catch ex As Exception Response.Write("ERROR : " & ex.ToString) Finally con.Close() End Try Show quote "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:B7DAD9ED-C410-40DB-BF31-702D75DAA22B@microsoft.com... > You are right, It would be syntactically wrong, I was trying to get the > pseudo code across for easy reading. The code would look like > > SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid from > Items where ItemName = something"); > //Lets say the query returne 10000 rows > SqlDataReader dr = cmd.ExecuteReader(); > while (dr.Read()) > { > //read and assign all values from datareader- skipped here > if (dr["LotValid"] == "false")//Lets say his condition comes true for the > 50th row > break; > } > dr.Close(); > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > "OHM ( One Handed Man )" wrote: > >> I think your code is invalid. >> >> > if LotValid = false; //<< This is an assignment not an equality >> > test >> >> > while dr.read >> > { >> > read and assign values >> > if LotValid = false; >> > break; >> > } >> > dr.close(); >> >> >> -- >> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man >> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net I think he means that the the closing of the datareader takes a long time,
and he is assuming that it must be going through the rest of the result set. Not that the codes is actually continuing to loop. Here is a snippet from the documentation: The Close method fills in the values for output parameters, return values and RecordsAffected, increasing the time that it takes to close a SqlDataReader that was used to process a large or complex query. When the return values and the number of records affected by a query are not significant, the time that it takes to close the SqlDataReader can be reduced by calling the Cancel method of the associated SqlCommand object before calling the Close method. According to this, performance should be improved by calling Cancel on the SqlCommand object before closing the datareader. Show quote "OHM ( One Handed Man )" <m*@mine.com> wrote in message news:utpmKxiYGHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >I created 10,000 records and wrote this code in vb.net to emulate what you >did, it worked fine and terminates properly at 50 items. > > Dim conString As String = > "Server=LOUNGE;Database=TEST;Trusted_Connection=True;" > Dim sqlString As String = "SELECT * FROM [Test];" > Dim con As New Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection(conString) > Dim sqlCommand As New Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand(sqlString, con) > > Dim rdr As Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader > > Try > con.Open() > rdr = sqlCommand.ExecuteReader > Dim x As Int16 = 0 > While rdr.Read() > Response.Write(rdr(0).ToString & "<BR>") > If x > 50 Then Exit While > x += 1 > End While > rdr.Close() > Catch ex As Exception > Response.Write("ERROR : " & ex.ToString) > Finally > con.Close() > > End Try > > -- > ( OHM ) - One Handed Man > AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net > "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:B7DAD9ED-C410-40DB-BF31-702D75DAA22B@microsoft.com... >> You are right, It would be syntactically wrong, I was trying to get the >> pseudo code across for easy reading. The code would look like >> >> SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid >> from >> Items where ItemName = something"); >> //Lets say the query returne 10000 rows >> SqlDataReader dr = cmd.ExecuteReader(); >> while (dr.Read()) >> { >> //read and assign all values from datareader- skipped here >> if (dr["LotValid"] == "false")//Lets say his condition comes true for the >> 50th row >> break; >> } >> dr.Close(); >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> "OHM ( One Handed Man )" wrote: >> >>> I think your code is invalid. >>> >>> > if LotValid = false; //<< This is an assignment not an equality >>> > test >>> >>> > while dr.read >>> > { >>> > read and assign values >>> > if LotValid = false; >>> > break; >>> > } >>> > dr.close(); >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man >>> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net > > OK thanks for the insite. In my test, the result was instant without using
cancel. Show quote "Marina Levit [MVP]" <someone@nospam.com> wrote in message news:u67vP8iYGHA.1192@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >I think he means that the the closing of the datareader takes a long time, >and he is assuming that it must be going through the rest of the result >set. Not that the codes is actually continuing to loop. > > Here is a snippet from the documentation: > The Close method fills in the values for output parameters, return values > and RecordsAffected, increasing the time that it takes to close a > SqlDataReader that was used to process a large or complex query. When the > return values and the number of records affected by a query are not > significant, the time that it takes to close the SqlDataReader can be > reduced by calling the Cancel method of the associated SqlCommand object > before calling the Close method. > > According to this, performance should be improved by calling Cancel on the > SqlCommand object before closing the datareader. > > "OHM ( One Handed Man )" <m*@mine.com> wrote in message > news:utpmKxiYGHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>I created 10,000 records and wrote this code in vb.net to emulate what you >>did, it worked fine and terminates properly at 50 items. >> >> Dim conString As String = >> "Server=LOUNGE;Database=TEST;Trusted_Connection=True;" >> Dim sqlString As String = "SELECT * FROM [Test];" >> Dim con As New Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection(conString) >> Dim sqlCommand As New Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand(sqlString, con) >> >> Dim rdr As Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader >> >> Try >> con.Open() >> rdr = sqlCommand.ExecuteReader >> Dim x As Int16 = 0 >> While rdr.Read() >> Response.Write(rdr(0).ToString & "<BR>") >> If x > 50 Then Exit While >> x += 1 >> End While >> rdr.Close() >> Catch ex As Exception >> Response.Write("ERROR : " & ex.ToString) >> Finally >> con.Close() >> >> End Try >> >> -- >> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man >> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net >> "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:B7DAD9ED-C410-40DB-BF31-702D75DAA22B@microsoft.com... >>> You are right, It would be syntactically wrong, I was trying to get the >>> pseudo code across for easy reading. The code would look like >>> >>> SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid >>> from >>> Items where ItemName = something"); >>> //Lets say the query returne 10000 rows >>> SqlDataReader dr = cmd.ExecuteReader(); >>> while (dr.Read()) >>> { >>> //read and assign all values from datareader- skipped here >>> if (dr["LotValid"] == "false")//Lets say his condition comes true for >>> the >>> 50th row >>> break; >>> } >>> dr.Close(); >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> "OHM ( One Handed Man )" wrote: >>> >>>> I think your code is invalid. >>>> >>>> > if LotValid = false; //<< This is an assignment not an equality >>>> > test >>>> >>>> > while dr.read >>>> > { >>>> > read and assign values >>>> > if LotValid = false; >>>> > break; >>>> > } >>>> > dr.close(); >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man >>>> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net >> >> > > I guess it depends on the actual query and the sql server, etc.
Show quote "OHM ( One Handed Man )" <m*@mine.com> wrote in message news:OM%23iAHkYGHA.4060@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > OK thanks for the insite. In my test, the result was instant without using > cancel. > > -- > ( OHM ) - One Handed Man > AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net > > "Marina Levit [MVP]" <someone@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:u67vP8iYGHA.1192@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>I think he means that the the closing of the datareader takes a long time, >>and he is assuming that it must be going through the rest of the result >>set. Not that the codes is actually continuing to loop. >> >> Here is a snippet from the documentation: >> The Close method fills in the values for output parameters, return values >> and RecordsAffected, increasing the time that it takes to close a >> SqlDataReader that was used to process a large or complex query. When the >> return values and the number of records affected by a query are not >> significant, the time that it takes to close the SqlDataReader can be >> reduced by calling the Cancel method of the associated SqlCommand object >> before calling the Close method. >> >> According to this, performance should be improved by calling Cancel on >> the SqlCommand object before closing the datareader. >> >> "OHM ( One Handed Man )" <m*@mine.com> wrote in message >> news:utpmKxiYGHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>I created 10,000 records and wrote this code in vb.net to emulate what >>>you did, it worked fine and terminates properly at 50 items. >>> >>> Dim conString As String = >>> "Server=LOUNGE;Database=TEST;Trusted_Connection=True;" >>> Dim sqlString As String = "SELECT * FROM [Test];" >>> Dim con As New Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection(conString) >>> Dim sqlCommand As New Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand(sqlString, con) >>> >>> Dim rdr As Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader >>> >>> Try >>> con.Open() >>> rdr = sqlCommand.ExecuteReader >>> Dim x As Int16 = 0 >>> While rdr.Read() >>> Response.Write(rdr(0).ToString & "<BR>") >>> If x > 50 Then Exit While >>> x += 1 >>> End While >>> rdr.Close() >>> Catch ex As Exception >>> Response.Write("ERROR : " & ex.ToString) >>> Finally >>> con.Close() >>> >>> End Try >>> >>> -- >>> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man >>> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net >>> "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>> news:B7DAD9ED-C410-40DB-BF31-702D75DAA22B@microsoft.com... >>>> You are right, It would be syntactically wrong, I was trying to get the >>>> pseudo code across for easy reading. The code would look like >>>> >>>> SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid >>>> from >>>> Items where ItemName = something"); >>>> //Lets say the query returne 10000 rows >>>> SqlDataReader dr = cmd.ExecuteReader(); >>>> while (dr.Read()) >>>> { >>>> //read and assign all values from datareader- skipped here >>>> if (dr["LotValid"] == "false")//Lets say his condition comes true for >>>> the >>>> 50th row >>>> break; >>>> } >>>> dr.Close(); >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> "OHM ( One Handed Man )" wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think your code is invalid. >>>>> >>>>> > if LotValid = false; //<< This is an assignment not an equality >>>>> > test >>>>> >>>>> > while dr.read >>>>> > { >>>>> > read and assign values >>>>> > if LotValid = false; >>>>> > break; >>>>> > } >>>>> > dr.close(); >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man >>>>> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net >>> >>> >> >> > > Thanks Marina, that is exactly what I meant. I found a post on .NET 247 which
says ---This is by design. When you ask for 100 or 10000 rows to be piped to your app with the DataReader, the engine provides those rows--whether you use them all or not. If you close the Reader, ADO.NET has no choice but to comply with your first request and fetch all of the rows to empty the pipe. It's better to: a) Ask for just the rows you need b) If you have to close the reader before EOF, use the Cancel method on the Command. This (might) stop the flow of rows--assuming the server can handle it.--- However, I cannot ask for just the rows that I need and the second method doesn't seem to help. Show quote "Marina Levit [MVP]" wrote: > I guess it depends on the actual query and the sql server, etc. > > "OHM ( One Handed Man )" <m*@mine.com> wrote in message > news:OM%23iAHkYGHA.4060@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > OK thanks for the insite. In my test, the result was instant without using > > cancel. > > > > -- > > ( OHM ) - One Handed Man > > AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net > > > > "Marina Levit [MVP]" <someone@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:u67vP8iYGHA.1192@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > >>I think he means that the the closing of the datareader takes a long time, > >>and he is assuming that it must be going through the rest of the result > >>set. Not that the codes is actually continuing to loop. > >> > >> Here is a snippet from the documentation: > >> The Close method fills in the values for output parameters, return values > >> and RecordsAffected, increasing the time that it takes to close a > >> SqlDataReader that was used to process a large or complex query. When the > >> return values and the number of records affected by a query are not > >> significant, the time that it takes to close the SqlDataReader can be > >> reduced by calling the Cancel method of the associated SqlCommand object > >> before calling the Close method. > >> > >> According to this, performance should be improved by calling Cancel on > >> the SqlCommand object before closing the datareader. > >> > >> "OHM ( One Handed Man )" <m*@mine.com> wrote in message > >> news:utpmKxiYGHA.4652@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > >>>I created 10,000 records and wrote this code in vb.net to emulate what > >>>you did, it worked fine and terminates properly at 50 items. > >>> > >>> Dim conString As String = > >>> "Server=LOUNGE;Database=TEST;Trusted_Connection=True;" > >>> Dim sqlString As String = "SELECT * FROM [Test];" > >>> Dim con As New Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection(conString) > >>> Dim sqlCommand As New Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand(sqlString, con) > >>> > >>> Dim rdr As Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader > >>> > >>> Try > >>> con.Open() > >>> rdr = sqlCommand.ExecuteReader > >>> Dim x As Int16 = 0 > >>> While rdr.Read() > >>> Response.Write(rdr(0).ToString & "<BR>") > >>> If x > 50 Then Exit While > >>> x += 1 > >>> End While > >>> rdr.Close() > >>> Catch ex As Exception > >>> Response.Write("ERROR : " & ex.ToString) > >>> Finally > >>> con.Close() > >>> > >>> End Try > >>> > >>> -- > >>> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man > >>> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net > >>> "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > >>> news:B7DAD9ED-C410-40DB-BF31-702D75DAA22B@microsoft.com... > >>>> You are right, It would be syntactically wrong, I was trying to get the > >>>> pseudo code across for easy reading. The code would look like > >>>> > >>>> SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("Select ItemName, ItemValue, LotValid > >>>> from > >>>> Items where ItemName = something"); > >>>> //Lets say the query returne 10000 rows > >>>> SqlDataReader dr = cmd.ExecuteReader(); > >>>> while (dr.Read()) > >>>> { > >>>> //read and assign all values from datareader- skipped here > >>>> if (dr["LotValid"] == "false")//Lets say his condition comes true for > >>>> the > >>>> 50th row > >>>> break; > >>>> } > >>>> dr.Close(); > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> > >>>> "OHM ( One Handed Man )" wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I think your code is invalid. > >>>>> > >>>>> > if LotValid = false; //<< This is an assignment not an equality > >>>>> > test > >>>>> > >>>>> > while dr.read > >>>>> > { > >>>>> > read and assign values > >>>>> > if LotValid = false; > >>>>> > break; > >>>>> > } > >>>>> > dr.close(); > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> ( OHM ) - One Handed Man > >>>>> AKA Terry Burns - http://TrainingOn.net > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message Yes.news:1E8D6A7D-92C6-4B31-8A22-78B169FBD231@microsoft.com... > Thanks Marina, that is exactly what I meant. I found a post on .NET 247 > which > says ---This is by design. When you ask for 100 or 10000 rows to be piped > to > your > app with the DataReader, the engine provides those rows--whether you use > them all or not. If you close the Reader, ADO.NET has no choice but to > comply with your first request and fetch all of the rows to empty the > pipe. > It's better to: Why?> a) Ask for just the rows you need > b) If you have to close the reader before EOF, use the Cancel method on > the Command. This (might) stop the flow of rows--assuming the server can > handle it.--- However, I cannot ask for just the rows that I need and the Show quote > second method doesn't seem to help. -- Miha Markic [MVP C#] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ My code and the SQL Queries is not handwritten. It is generated from our code
generator. So I will need something which is very generic. Show quote "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" wrote: > > "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:1E8D6A7D-92C6-4B31-8A22-78B169FBD231@microsoft.com... > > Thanks Marina, that is exactly what I meant. I found a post on .NET 247 > > which > > says ---This is by design. When you ask for 100 or 10000 rows to be piped > > to > > your > > app with the DataReader, the engine provides those rows--whether you use > > them all or not. If you close the Reader, ADO.NET has no choice but to > > comply with your first request and fetch all of the rows to empty the > > pipe. > > Yes. > > > It's better to: > > a) Ask for just the rows you need > > b) If you have to close the reader before EOF, use the Cancel method on > > the Command. This (might) stop the flow of rows--assuming the server can > > handle it.--- However, I cannot ask for just the rows that I need > > Why? > > and the > > second method doesn't seem to help. > > -- > Miha Markic [MVP C#] > RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com > Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ > > > Hi Santosh,
This is called bad bad bad design. -- Show quoteMiha Markic [MVP C#] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:859CB155-A9EB-457E-96A5-95F569E517FB@microsoft.com... > My code and the SQL Queries is not handwritten. It is generated from our > code > generator. So I will need something which is very generic. > > "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" wrote: > >> >> "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:1E8D6A7D-92C6-4B31-8A22-78B169FBD231@microsoft.com... >> > Thanks Marina, that is exactly what I meant. I found a post on .NET 247 >> > which >> > says ---This is by design. When you ask for 100 or 10000 rows to be >> > piped >> > to >> > your >> > app with the DataReader, the engine provides those rows--whether you >> > use >> > them all or not. If you close the Reader, ADO.NET has no choice but to >> > comply with your first request and fetch all of the rows to empty the >> > pipe. >> >> Yes. >> >> > It's better to: >> > a) Ask for just the rows you need >> > b) If you have to close the reader before EOF, use the Cancel method on >> > the Command. This (might) stop the flow of rows--assuming the server >> > can >> > handle it.--- However, I cannot ask for just the rows that I need >> >> Why? >> >> and the >> > second method doesn't seem to help. >> >> -- >> Miha Markic [MVP C#] >> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com >> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ >> >> >> :-) I would tend to agree to this in a normal application. But when there are layers of abstraction and generalizations, A bad design that works seems to be the best alternative. Can you think of someway to work around this. Show quote "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" wrote: > Hi Santosh, > > This is called bad bad bad design. > > -- > Miha Markic [MVP C#] > RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com > Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ > > "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:859CB155-A9EB-457E-96A5-95F569E517FB@microsoft.com... > > My code and the SQL Queries is not handwritten. It is generated from our > > code > > generator. So I will need something which is very generic. > > > > "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" wrote: > > > >> > >> "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > >> news:1E8D6A7D-92C6-4B31-8A22-78B169FBD231@microsoft.com... > >> > Thanks Marina, that is exactly what I meant. I found a post on .NET 247 > >> > which > >> > says ---This is by design. When you ask for 100 or 10000 rows to be > >> > piped > >> > to > >> > your > >> > app with the DataReader, the engine provides those rows--whether you > >> > use > >> > them all or not. If you close the Reader, ADO.NET has no choice but to > >> > comply with your first request and fetch all of the rows to empty the > >> > pipe. > >> > >> Yes. > >> > >> > It's better to: > >> > a) Ask for just the rows you need > >> > b) If you have to close the reader before EOF, use the Cancel method on > >> > the Command. This (might) stop the flow of rows--assuming the server > >> > can > >> > handle it.--- However, I cannot ask for just the rows that I need > >> > >> Why? > >> > >> and the > >> > second method doesn't seem to help. > >> > >> -- > >> Miha Markic [MVP C#] > >> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com > >> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ > >> > >> > >> > > > "Santosh" <Sant***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message Perhaps use better architecture as I do. It is hard to speculate without news:A04AE132-7C9E-42C1-BF46-2DF838507574@microsoft.com... > :-) I would tend to agree to this in a normal application. But when there > are > layers of abstraction and generalizations, A bad design that works seems > to > be the best alternative. > Can you think of someway to work around this. much information though but using optimal sql commands with database is critical as in a normal application most time is spent in database operations. And you could easily kill your application if you don't pay attention to this. -- Miha Markic [MVP C#] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/  |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics