microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.caching

offwhite

9/25/2006 8:17:00 PM

While the caching features are in the System.Web namespace, you are not
required to use them within a web application. In fact, you can use
them on a console application or bury them safely in a library used in
a different tier of your application.

User this code to get a reference...

Cache cache = HttpRuntime.Cache;

>From there you can map your dependencies and invalidate the data on
data/domain tier and only expose the public interface of your business
objects.

Brennan Stehling
http://brennan.offwhite...

intrepid_dw@hotmail.com wrote:
> Hello, all.
>
> I'd like to ask a question about the structure of a .NET Web
> application and how ASP.NET 2.0 implements SQL cache invalidation.
>
> MS provides an ObjectDataSource class to leverage existing external
> "business objects" used to get data from a database. That class
> supports a SqlCacheDependency property wherein you identify the table
> name with which the object is associated. So far so good, but...
>
> Now, here's where I'm having a problem. My business object exists
> because I want my application in tiers, as the conventional wisdom
> holds. That said, it appears that I end up (or at least coming pretty
> darned close to) breaking my "tiering" by hard-coding an actual
> database and table name in the SqlCacheDependency property of that
> ObjectDataSource. Put another way, I'm exposing/hard coding database
> details declaratively to use an object that exists, among other
> reasons, to keep specific data like that out of the web application.
>
> Perhaps I'm simply not understanding something correctly, but at a
> glance this this seems out of whack to me, although it could simply be
> that I'm the one who is out of whack :0). It would seem that, in this
> case, using the non-SQL-based caching of the ObjectDataSource might be
> a better path for preservation of application tiering.
>
> So, my specific questions are:
>
> 1. Is my understanding of the ObjectDataSource correct?
> 2. Is my understanding of the SqlCacheDependency property correct?
> 3. Is the hard-coding of database/table names in this instance not
> really considered a breaking of the desired tiering?
>
> I appreciate any thoughts, suggestions, or corrective comments anyone
> might have.
>
> Thanks,
> -intrepid