DotNetNuke

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

AerosSaga — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:05:04 GMT

We are in public beta for the time being with a scheduled RTM release on March 31st. You can grab the latest beta here once you register.

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

adefwebserver — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:48:35 GMT

I have made an update on the DAL II here:

http://www.dotnetnuke.com/Community/Blogs/tabid/825/EntryID/345/Default.aspx

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

Cepheus — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 08:45:07 GMT

Are you finished with the proof of concepts? If not, I think I want to make a NHibernate version. Anyone knows the curent status?

Thanks, Rainer.

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

MyGeneration — Thu, 01 Sep 2005 06:39:28 GMT

Here's something interesting, I created a template that generates ASP.NET pages, the generated pages make good sys-admin pages for folks to admin SQL server (or 8 other DBMS systems). The template can be found here http://www.mygenerationsoftware.com/TemplateLibrary/Archive/?guid=e38b4cdb-a62d-4d3d-9084-a43ff25d9056 however, that's not the interesting part. If you look at this page you can see a normal ASP.NET page that was generated by the template http://www.mygenerationsoftware.com/portal/TemplateShowcase/dOOdadsInlineGrid/Dependents/tabid/96/Default.aspx but that's not the interesting part either. Luciano Terra took one of the pages and created a DNN module out of it, see http://www.mygenerationsoftware.com/portal/TemplateShowcase/LucianoTerras/dOOdadsonDNN/tabid/100/Default.aspx

Now that is cool, the page is generated, not a line of hand edited work, of course the dOOdads were generated too. Anyway, for what it's worth ...

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

MyGeneration — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:53:16 GMT

As far as DAL's go many thanx on the kind words concerning dOOdads, If you like dOOdads and need to use the Microsoft Enterprise Library you might want to have a look at Matt Noonan's EasyObjects, its a adaptation of dOOdads for the Microsoft Enterprise Library (EntLib/DAAB) see http://www.easyobjects.net/. David Parsons has volunteered and is implementing Aggregates in dOOdads like Sum/Min/Max/Avg/Count and so on in the familiar dOOdads dynamic query syntax, it's up on Tigris but those enhancements are complete or tested yet. Also, myself and a band of volunteers are working on EntitySpaces, a new 2.0 .NET Architecture that is provider independent. Activity is picking up on it too. Scott Schecter is working on the Access provider, Justin is doing the SQLite provider and others have fallen in line to do the others. The dOOdads namespace will co-exist in EntitySpaces. EntitySpaces can use stored proc's or dynamic sql. Anyway, that's the report from the architecture headquarters deep underground the cornfields of Indiana ...

Oh, ya, MyGeneration released it's first DNN Module (sure, it's for public relations purposes but still very useful). It lists the top 10 downloaded or top 10 most recent templates in MyGeneration's online template library. You can filter on author, title or namespace, it's on Matt's site, and both MyGeneration and EntitySpaces if you want to have a look see ....

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

kevin.weir — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:15:10 GMT

Hi Jose

ObjectSpaces has been pulled from Visual Studio 2005 and its future remans uncertain. Having said that, I believe it will return in some form in a future release.

Kevin

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

adefwebserver — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 16:28:29 GMT

JAugustoGuimaraes wrote:
Take a look at Microsoft ObjectSpaces before change the DAL.

I think the work we are doing on the FireBird provider (FireBirdDotNuke) illustrates what the purpose of the current DAL is and what any modifications of it should consider.

The current DAL allows a complete separation of the code from the data source. It does this by specifying a separate assembly (a "custom data provider") that simply overrides methods and communicates with the data source. the DAL does not concern it's self with "how" the "custom data provider" talks with the data source or what that data source is. This allows projects like the FireBirdDotNuke project to create a "Firebird custom data provider" and do anything we want in that "custom data provider" to communicate with the FireBird database. The only problem is we have to create a "Firebird custom data provider" for every module. Thankfully, Sanjay Mehrotra has donated this code to the project. We only need to create the Firebird stored procedures and we are working on that now.

The current DAL will work with any data source, period.

Any proposal will have to keep this in mind when suggesting a change. The DAL II project is attempting to show that an "generic data provider" can provide all the functionality of a "custom data provider".

This brings me to the O/R mapping proposals:
1) Do they work with all data sources, period?

2) Does it provide the best performance?

It appears to me:
1) MyGeneration (dOOdads) supports a lot of data sources (Microsoft SQL, Oracle, Firebird, Access, PostgreSQL, VistaDB, SQLite, and MySQL ). ObjectSpaces does not. But, do they work with all data sources, period? That question remains.

2) I have an asp.net application where I retrieve a list of the closest doctor's offices when given a zip code. This application calls a stored procedure that uses a UDF (user Defined Function) to perform the trigonometry calculation on every single record in the database and returns the list. It calls the stored procedure once and it returns the records. It is very fast. Can I duplicate this functionality and speed using an O/R mapper? That question remains.

It appears to me the purpose of the O/R mappers is to allow a person to design an application and concentrate on objects rather than the data source. This is a great application design objective but is it a proper objective of a framework?

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

JAugustoGuimaraes — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 07:59:12 GMT

Take a look at Microsoft ObjectSpaces before change the DAL.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnadonet/html/objectspaces.asp

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

adefwebserver — Sat, 06 Aug 2005 13:31:49 GMT

donker wrote:
It could be OT, but the elegance of dOOdads (see this post) seems attractive to me as well. Could this elegance find it's way into the DAL II proposal?

The DAL II proposal is complete. We are in the answering questions and clarifying stage.I have encouraged the proponents of dOOdads and MyGeneration software to make a proposal so that O/R mapping could be represented for consideration. I hope they decide to do that.

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

donker — Sat, 06 Aug 2005 13:18:59 GMT

It could be OT, but the elegance of dOOdads (see this post) seems attractive to me as well. Could this elegance find it's way into the DAL II proposal?

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

Geert — Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:46:26 GMT

IndianGuru,

I don't mind you asking questions at all, but I was refering to your question when it would be implemented in the Core where it was clearly stated that the proposal for DAL II has not even been offered to the Core Team yet....

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

IndianGuru — Fri, 15 Jul 2005 07:01:31 GMT

Geert,

I have read this thread since it started. and this is probabaly the only thread that I have read religiously. I dont seem to be remebering more than a handful of post that I have made since about six months here in Forum, mainly because of such comments. you would notice that I have only posted less than 50 post since last six months. That to basically the answers, (I have stopped asking here in Forums, I now prefer to ask, the people whom I know, I don't want to ask a single question, which I can help)

I am asking because I am very much interested. I am asking because this shows me a ray of light.

Yes, I may not understand all the technicalities that Michael and other great people are discussing here. I only understand a single Point, that this will reduce the compelxity and work for me, as an Module Developer.

Do you mean, one should not ask, if he doesn't understand or anticipate ? (then, if he understands, why should he ask ? )

May I ask, why are you discouraging asking ?

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

Geert — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:22:26 GMT

IndianGuru wrote:
JWhite wrote:
I would also say that any new DAL would likely represent a MAJOR version increment. i.e. 4.0 or 5.0 etc. so it would be easy for Module developers to target. i.e. these modules for DNN 2.x, these for 3.x and these for 4.X.

See !!! you have furhter added fuel to the fire

But when ? just when ?

Really IndianGuru (whatever your real name is),

If you ask questions like this, you really have no idea what the DAL II project that Michael has committed to is all about.
Have you really read all the posts here ?
Or do you really ask this question just because you want to ?

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

DBuckner — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:12:11 GMT

adefwebserver wrote:
The DAL II proposal is backward compatable

Michael,

I know I read that before, thanks for reminding me! With as many tables involved in my project I started getting nervous and forgot all about it.

Cheers,
Dave

Re: Creating a "proof of concept" for a new DAL

IndianGuru — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:01:03 GMT

JWhite wrote:
I would also say that any new DAL would likely represent a MAJOR version increment. i.e. 4.0 or 5.0 etc. so it would be easy for Module developers to target. i.e. these modules for DNN 2.x, these for 3.x and these for 4.X.

See !!! you have furhter added fuel to the fire

But when ? just when ?