is Connection.close() enough or

[mavrick_101]

do I need to explicitly do a

Connection.Dispose() too?

Thnx

[Karl Seguin [MVP]]

There's a load question (loaded in the sense that it can spark a debate).

In practice, your safe doing just .Close().

But, your asking for trouble not disposing of objects that implement
IDisposable. Point in case, SqlConnection's Dispose in 2.0 seems to do more
than in 1.x (I still don't think it _has_ to be called)..but who knows what
3.0 will do, and do you really want to go back through all your code and
change it then?
Generally, ur better off just calling Dispose() (which calls close) and not
calling close. Or, use "using"

Karl

--
http://www.openmymind.net/
http://www.fuelindustries.com/
"mavrick_101" <ma********@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D**********************************@microsof t.com...

do I need to explicitly do a

Connection.Dispose() too?

Thnx

[mavrick_101]

Thanks for your response, Karl.

So equivalent of
connection.close();
connection.dispose();

would be
connection.dispose(); and that would close the conneciton too..

Cool.

"Karl Seguin [MVP]" wrote:

There's a load question (loaded in the sense that it can spark a debate).

In practice, your safe doing just .Close().

But, your asking for trouble not disposing of objects that implement
IDisposable. Point in case, SqlConnection's Dispose in 2.0 seems to do more
than in 1.x (I still don't think it _has_ to be called)..but who knows what
3.0 will do, and do you really want to go back through all your code and
change it then?
Generally, ur better off just calling Dispose() (which calls close) and not
calling close. Or, use "using"

Karl

--
http://www.openmymind.net/
http://www.fuelindustries.com/
"mavrick_101" <ma********@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D**********************************@microsof t.com...

do I need to explicitly do a

Connection.Dispose() too?

Thnx

[bruce barker \(sqlwork.com\)]

Connection.Dispose calls Close. the main difference, is calling Displose
will release any event handler references. the best approach is to not call
either, but use a using statement:

using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection())
{
// my code here
}

this will guarantee that the connection dispose is called, even of you have
an error, or exit the routine. as its a bad practice to pass a sqlconnection
between methods, this will keep you honest.

-- bruce (sqlwork.com)
"mavrick_101" <ma********@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D**********************************@microsof t.com...

do I need to explicitly do a

Connection.Dispose() too?

Thnx

[Karl Seguin [MVP]]

Get reflector (free) from http://www.aisto.com/roeder/dotnet/ and open up
the code yourself...it's an insanely useful tool. Make sure you have it set
to dissassemble to C# or VB.NET...and not IL :)

Karl

--
http://www.openmymind.net/
http://www.fuelindustries.com/
"mavrick_101" <ma********@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B3**********************************@microsof t.com...

Thanks for your response, Karl.

So equivalent of
connection.close();
connection.dispose();

would be
connection.dispose(); and that would close the conneciton too..

Cool.

"Karl Seguin [MVP]" wrote:

There's a load question (loaded in the sense that it can spark a debate).

In practice, your safe doing just .Close().

But, your asking for trouble not disposing of objects that implement
IDisposable. Point in case, SqlConnection's Dispose in 2.0 seems to do
more
than in 1.x (I still don't think it _has_ to be called)..but who knows
what
3.0 will do, and do you really want to go back through all your code and
change it then?
Generally, ur better off just calling Dispose() (which calls close) and
not
calling close. Or, use "using"

Karl

--
http://www.openmymind.net/
http://www.fuelindustries.com/
"mavrick_101" <ma********@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D**********************************@microsof t.com...

> do I need to explicitly do a
>
> Connection.Dispose() too?
>
> Thnx

[Göran Andersson]

Yes.

I use the "using" keyword, which gives neat code, and ensures that the
connection is always closed, whatever happens:

using (SqlConnection connecton = new SqlConnection(...)) {
...
...
} // when leaving here, the connection is disposed

The code that is really created is a try...finally structure with the
dispose call in the finally section. It also copies the reference to the
object, so even if you fumble badly and lose your reference to the
object, it still gets disposed. :)
mavrick_101 wrote:

Thanks for your response, Karl.

So equivalent of
connection.close();
connection.dispose();

would be
connection.dispose(); and that would close the conneciton too..

Cool.

"Karl Seguin [MVP]" wrote:

There's a load question (loaded in the sense that it can spark a debate).

In practice, your safe doing just .Close().

But, your asking for trouble not disposing of objects that implement
IDisposable. Point in case, SqlConnection's Dispose in 2.0 seems to do more
than in 1.x (I still don't think it _has_ to be called)..but who knows what
3.0 will do, and do you really want to go back through all your code and
change it then?
Generally, ur better off just calling Dispose() (which calls close) and not
calling close. Or, use "using"

Karl

--
http://www.openmymind.net/
http://www.fuelindustries.com/
"mavrick_101" <ma********@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D**********************************@microsof t.com...

do I need to explicitly do a

Connection.Dispose() too?

Thnx

[mavrick_101]

It makes more sense now.

Thnx

"mavrick_101" wrote:

do I need to explicitly do a

Connection.Dispose() too?

Thnx