473,573 Members | 2,870 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

typed datasets vs. business objects

I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a custom
class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then bind
it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating, because
it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the data access
layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter up my solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they as
efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill

Jun 27 '08 #1
12 3566

"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..
I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a custom
class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then bind
it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating,
because it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the data
access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter up my
solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they as
efficient, with all the looping required?
So why can't you just use a Business Object that accesses a DAL object that
brings back the dataset and bind it to the grid's data source? There is
nothing stopping you from doing that. The UI or Presentation tier should not
directly access a database.

There is nothing stopping you from making a DAL object that access a
database table , populate a dataset and return that dataset all the way back
to the UI through the Business Layer and bind the dataset to the control.

As a matter of fact, the UI should totally be unaware of the Business
objects (loosely coupled) UI with the Business Object layer, which is
accomplished with the Presentation layer interfaces that interact with the
Business layer objects. You can send down or bring up things like datasets,
arraylist, strings, List, int. long or whatever through the interface of the
Presentation tier.

What am I talking about?

MODEL-VIEW-PRESENTER

http://www.polymorphicpodcast.com/

click 'Shows'

click 'Design Patterns Bootcamp: Model View * Patterns*

view parts 1-5

But for the example you're presently concerned about, just bring back the
dataset from the DAL to the BUS and bind the dataset to the control.

Busobject bo = new Busobject();

datagrid1,Datas ource = bo.GetDataset() ; // the DAL returns a dataset to
the BUS and the BUS returns a dataset binds the dataset to the control.



Jun 27 '08 #2

"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..
I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a custom
class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then bind
it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating,
because it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the data
access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter up my
solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they as
efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill
Im sure behind the scenes datasets loop through things anyway....besid es
thats what computers do, they loop...I wouldnt worry to much about that...

I'm by no means a guru. As I have only really experienced datasets, but I
have done lots and lots and lots of reading on them vs custom objects. All
my research can pretty much be sumed up with the following ; Datasets are
excellent for small projects but large and/or complicated projects they just
keep you hemmed in....so for big project it's worth the setup of custom
objects.

My current project is based on datasets and its groovy in some regards, but
its going to become a real pain in the butt later down the track.

The amount of work I have done to just get my datasets generated has been
too much....Draggin and dropping stuff on to xsd every time the DB
changes....ugg. ..so im trying to generate them and its no easy task.....I
wish we had of gone custom business objects...but then I havent been there
so I cant tell you....but thats where everything points...

I like neat also....it means quicker more readable code...its worth
alot...datasets are by no means neat :(

Hope that helps
John Sheppard

Jun 27 '08 #3

"John Sheppard" <sp**@nospam.co mwrote in message
news:fv******** *@news2.newsguy .com...
>
"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..
>I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a custom
class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then
bind it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating,
because it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the
data access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter up
my solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they as
efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill

Im sure behind the scenes datasets loop through things anyway....besid es
thats what computers do, they loop...I wouldnt worry to much about that...

I'm by no means a guru. As I have only really experienced datasets, but I
have done lots and lots and lots of reading on them vs custom objects. All
my research can pretty much be sumed up with the following ; Datasets are
excellent for small projects but large and/or complicated projects they
just keep you hemmed in....so for big project it's worth the setup of
custom objects.

My current project is based on datasets and its groovy in some regards,
but its going to become a real pain in the butt later down the track.

The amount of work I have done to just get my datasets generated has been
too much....Draggin and dropping stuff on to xsd every time the DB
changes....ugg. ..so im trying to generate them and its no easy task.....I
wish we had of gone custom business objects...but then I havent been there
so I cant tell you....but thats where everything points...

I like neat also....it means quicker more readable code...its worth
alot...datasets are by no means neat :(
Why does this person need a custom business object in an Arraylist of
objects in the case of binding data to a control? If the dataset is being
used in a forward only manner, then simply binding the dataset to the
control is a much cleaner and faster solution.

And I beg to differ with you about a dataset being used in big projects. I
worked at a client site that used an in-house written object code generator
that pointed to SQL based on using stored procedures only, and everything
was generated using datatables and datasets in the DAL. The DAL was used by
Windows Desktop, Windows Service and Web applications, which was also used
in large projects.

A dataset is just a representation of data in memory. That's all it is, and
datasets used in a DAL is just as fast and a viable solution than using
custom objects at the DAL that are not using datasets and datatables, which
one could still customize the code of the DAL that used the DAL database
engine.

It's a mistake using datasets and datatables in the UI in your example
above. The database access should have been extracted from the UI so that
one doesn't face the problems that you are facing or will face for large
projects.

Jun 27 '08 #4
I've done it both ways, and I generally prefer business objects. I have more
control over what's happening. I'd say another factor is if you are using
vs2008 or vs2005, and if you are creating the typed datasets to pull data
from a database, or are just creating them to populate them some other way.

In VS2005, if you used the typed datasets to access the database, and then
had to go add a field, you had to re-create the typed dataset completely.

I think they have divorced this better in VS2008, or at least let you write
your own custom code that you can put in a partial class.

If you want an excellent book on how to do Business Objects w/o going into
Rocky Lhotka's framework stuff, check out Deborah Kurata's "Doing Objects in
VB2005". It shows how to set 'em up, what to put in your base classes, how
to set up the DAL, etc.

RobinS.
GoldMail.com

"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..
I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a custom
class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then bind
it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating,
because it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the data
access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter up my
solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they as
efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill
Jun 27 '08 #5
Bill,

What is your goal to make a sollution or to make something that has the
elitair sound of profesionality.

As soon as you do something that is elitair right, then you are probably
doing something wrong, otherwise it was accepted as well by others then the
bookwritting so called professionals..

(By this I do not mean all bookwritters).

Just my opinion.

Cor

"BillE" <be****@datamti .comschreef in bericht
news:O1******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..
I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a custom
class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then bind
it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating,
because it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the data
access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter up my
solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they as
efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill
Jun 27 '08 #6

Outside of Reporting, I use custom business objects 99.9% of the time.

Here is an example:
http://sholliday.space s.live.com/Blog/cns!A68482B9628 A842A!139.entry

Find the MS article I mention here ("bird's eye view") and read that thing
about 4 times.

...

SOMEBODY has to pay the looping price. Just because in a DataSet you're
encapsulated from it, the DataSet is being internally populated (via
looping) with an IDataReader.

Get the download code from the URL above. Somewhere I have a test that
shows the difference between a CustomCollectio n being populated, and a
DataSet (with constaints ON) and a DataSet (with constraints turned OFF).

I think the results will surprise you.

...

I wouldn't go back to a purely dataset model for ... an extra $30K salary.
They're such a pain in the butt, esp with Generics.
And finding data in a DataSet.Table with the el-crappo .Select method sucks.
PS

In 2.0, you'd be better off (IMHO, I know others may disagree) defined
something like:

public EmployeeCollect ion : List<Employee>
{
//that's it, that's all the code
}

instead of a return ArrayList.


At my blog above, I have a 2.0 version of that article.
Also check out my WCF/Interfaces blog entry, and just ignore the WCF stuff.
I have interfaces and custom objects/collections defined there.

IZebra
IZebraCollectio n
Zebra
ZebraCollection
...

"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..
I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a custom
class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then bind
it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating,
because it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the data
access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter up my
solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they as
efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill

Jun 27 '08 #7

"Mr. Arnold" <MR. Ar****@Arnold.c omwrote in message
news:eT******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP06.phx.gbl...
>
"John Sheppard" <sp**@nospam.co mwrote in message
news:fv******** *@news2.newsguy .com...
>>
"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1******* *********@TK2MS FTNGP03.phx.gbl ...
>>I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience.

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I loop
through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a
custom class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentatio n layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then
bind it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I don't
have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are aggravating,
because it seems like they have to be defined all the way down at the
data access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution. They clutter
up my solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they
as efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill

Im sure behind the scenes datasets loop through things anyway....besid es
thats what computers do, they loop...I wouldnt worry to much about
that...

I'm by no means a guru. As I have only really experienced datasets, but I
have done lots and lots and lots of reading on them vs custom objects.
All my research can pretty much be sumed up with the following ; Datasets
are excellent for small projects but large and/or complicated projects
they just keep you hemmed in....so for big project it's worth the setup
of custom objects.

My current project is based on datasets and its groovy in some regards,
but its going to become a real pain in the butt later down the track.

The amount of work I have done to just get my datasets generated has been
too much....Draggin and dropping stuff on to xsd every time the DB
changes....ugg ...so im trying to generate them and its no easy task.....I
wish we had of gone custom business objects...but then I havent been
there so I cant tell you....but thats where everything points...

I like neat also....it means quicker more readable code...its worth
alot...dataset s are by no means neat :(

Why does this person need a custom business object in an Arraylist of
objects in the case of binding data to a control? If the dataset is being
used in a forward only manner, then simply binding the dataset to the
control is a much cleaner and faster solution.

And I beg to differ with you about a dataset being used in big projects. I
worked at a client site that used an in-house written object code
generator that pointed to SQL based on using stored procedures only, and
everything was generated using datatables and datasets in the DAL. The
DAL was used by Windows Desktop, Windows Service and Web applications,
which was also used in large projects.
Thats exactly what we are doing...its taken me many weeks develop that
inhouse dal. I think it woulda been much quicker to use an orm of some kind
that generates the custom objects.

I am out of my league here tho, I should not have spoken so confidently :S
A dataset is just a representation of data in memory. That's all it is,
and datasets used in a DAL is just as fast and a viable solution than
using custom objects at the DAL that are not using datasets and
datatables, which one could still customize the code of the DAL that used
the DAL database engine.
Yeah, I guess I meant to say that just because he isnt writing the looping
code doesnt mean there isnt any there.
It's a mistake using datasets and datatables in the UI in your example
above. The database access should have been extracted from the UI so that
one doesn't face the problems that you are facing or will face for large
projects.
What would you bind to if there was no datasets to use at the UI level?

At current we just have one massive dataset which I use bindingsources to
attach to on the UI...

Thank you
John
Jun 27 '08 #8

"John Sheppard" <sp**@nospam.co mwrote in message
news:fv******** *@news2.newsguy .com...
>
"Mr. Arnold" <MR. Ar****@Arnold.c omwrote in message
news:eT******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP06.phx.gbl...
>>
"John Sheppard" <sp**@nospam.co mwrote in message
news:fv******* **@news2.newsgu y.com...
>>>
"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1****** **********@TK2M SFTNGP03.phx.gb l...
I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experience .

When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I
loop through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of a
custom class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to the
presentati on layer and bind the gridview to it.

If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then
bind it to the gridview.

It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I
don't have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are
aggravatin g, because it seems like they have to be defined all the way
down at the data access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution.
They clutter up my solution.

Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they
as efficient, with all the looping required?

Thanks
Bill
Im sure behind the scenes datasets loop through things anyway....besid es
thats what computers do, they loop...I wouldnt worry to much about
that...

I'm by no means a guru. As I have only really experienced datasets, but
I have done lots and lots and lots of reading on them vs custom objects.
All my research can pretty much be sumed up with the following ;
Datasets are excellent for small projects but large and/or complicated
projects they just keep you hemmed in....so for big project it's worth
the setup of custom objects.

My current project is based on datasets and its groovy in some regards,
but its going to become a real pain in the butt later down the track.

The amount of work I have done to just get my datasets generated has
been too much....Draggin and dropping stuff on to xsd every time the DB
changes....ug g...so im trying to generate them and its no easy
task.....I wish we had of gone custom business objects...but then I
havent been there so I cant tell you....but thats where everything
points...

I like neat also....it means quicker more readable code...its worth
alot...datase ts are by no means neat :(

Why does this person need a custom business object in an Arraylist of
objects in the case of binding data to a control? If the dataset is
being used in a forward only manner, then simply binding the dataset to
the control is a much cleaner and faster solution.

And I beg to differ with you about a dataset being used in big projects.
I worked at a client site that used an in-house written object code
generator that pointed to SQL based on using stored procedures only, and
everything was generated using datatables and datasets in the DAL. The
DAL was used by Windows Desktop, Windows Service and Web applications,
which was also used in large projects.

Thats exactly what we are doing...its taken me many weeks develop that
inhouse dal. I think it woulda been much quicker to use an orm of some
kind that generates the custom objects.
It took me all of 10 minutes to complete any code in the DAL using datasets
and datatables. The in-house written code generator created the DAL objects
that the in-house written database engine used. What I mean is someone wrote
the code to access SQL Server tables to create the primitive field types,
etc, etc. Someone wrote the (DLL) code for the database engine that was
inplemented in each DAL object. In other words, it was short of an ORM
application that was in-house written and worked well.
>
I am out of my league here tho, I should not have spoken so confidently :S
>A dataset is just a representation of data in memory. That's all it is,
and datasets used in a DAL is just as fast and a viable solution than
using custom objects at the DAL that are not using datasets and
datatables, which one could still customize the code of the DAL that used
the DAL database engine.

Yeah, I guess I meant to say that just because he isnt writing the looping
code doesnt mean there isnt any there.
>It's a mistake using datasets and datatables in the UI in your example
above. The database access should have been extracted from the UI so that
one doesn't face the problems that you are facing or will face for large
projects.

What would you bind to if there was no datasets to use at the UI level?
The mistake is if you are making direct calls from the UI to the database.
If you are going through UI-BL-DAL, that's not a problem. Direct database
access should be extracted from the UI.
>
At current we just have one massive dataset which I use bindingsources to
attach to on the UI...
Really? That's kind of ugly. But it's all in one dataset in memory. What
happens when you have to update or insert records into a database?

Jun 27 '08 #9

"Mr. Arnold" <MR. Ar****@Arnold.c omwrote in message
news:e7******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...
>
"John Sheppard" <sp**@nospam.co mwrote in message
news:fv******** *@news2.newsguy .com...
>>
"Mr. Arnold" <MR. Ar****@Arnold.c omwrote in message
news:eT******* *******@TK2MSFT NGP06.phx.gbl.. .
>>>
"John Sheppard" <sp**@nospam.co mwrote in message
news:fv****** ***@news2.newsg uy.com...

"BillE" <be****@datamti .comwrote in message
news:O1***** ***********@TK2 MSFTNGP03.phx.g bl...
I'm trying to decide if it is better to use typed datasets or business
objects, so I would appreciate any thoughts from someone with more
experienc e.
>
When I use a business object to populate a gridview, for example, I
loop through a datareader, populating an array list with instances of
a custom class in the middle tier, and then send the array list up to
the presentation layer and bind the gridview to it.
>
If I use a typed dataset, I just fill it with a data adapter and then
bind it to the gridview.
>
It seems like the typed dataset would be more efficient, because I
don't have to loop through anything. But typed datasets are
aggravating , because it seems like they have to be defined all the way
down at the data access layer to be accessible in a n-tier solution.
They clutter up my solution.
>
Business objects seem tidier, and seem more professional, but are they
as efficient, with all the looping required?
>
Thanks
Bill
>

Im sure behind the scenes datasets loop through things
anyway....be sides thats what computers do, they loop...I wouldnt worry
to much about that...

I'm by no means a guru. As I have only really experienced datasets, but
I have done lots and lots and lots of reading on them vs custom
objects. All my research can pretty much be sumed up with the following
; Datasets are excellent for small projects but large and/or
complicate d projects they just keep you hemmed in....so for big project
it's worth the setup of custom objects.

My current project is based on datasets and its groovy in some regards,
but its going to become a real pain in the butt later down the track.

The amount of work I have done to just get my datasets generated has
been too much....Draggin and dropping stuff on to xsd every time the DB
changes....u gg...so im trying to generate them and its no easy
task.....I wish we had of gone custom business objects...but then I
havent been there so I cant tell you....but thats where everything
points...

I like neat also....it means quicker more readable code...its worth
alot...datas ets are by no means neat :(

Why does this person need a custom business object in an Arraylist of
objects in the case of binding data to a control? If the dataset is
being used in a forward only manner, then simply binding the dataset to
the control is a much cleaner and faster solution.

And I beg to differ with you about a dataset being used in big projects.
I worked at a client site that used an in-house written object code
generator that pointed to SQL based on using stored procedures only, and
everything was generated using datatables and datasets in the DAL. The
DAL was used by Windows Desktop, Windows Service and Web applications,
which was also used in large projects.

Thats exactly what we are doing...its taken me many weeks develop that
inhouse dal. I think it woulda been much quicker to use an orm of some
kind that generates the custom objects.

It took me all of 10 minutes to complete any code in the DAL using
datasets and datatables. The in-house written code generator created the
DAL objects that the in-house written database engine used. What I mean is
someone wrote the code to access SQL Server tables to create the primitive
field types, etc, etc. Someone wrote the (DLL) code for the database
engine that was inplemented in each DAL object. In other words, it was
short of an ORM application that was in-house written and worked well.
>>
I am out of my league here tho, I should not have spoken so confidently
:S
>>A dataset is just a representation of data in memory. That's all it is,
and datasets used in a DAL is just as fast and a viable solution than
using custom objects at the DAL that are not using datasets and
datatables, which one could still customize the code of the DAL that
used the DAL database engine.

Yeah, I guess I meant to say that just because he isnt writing the
looping code doesnt mean there isnt any there.
>>It's a mistake using datasets and datatables in the UI in your example
above. The database access should have been extracted from the UI so
that one doesn't face the problems that you are facing or will face for
large projects.

What would you bind to if there was no datasets to use at the UI level?

The mistake is if you are making direct calls from the UI to the database.
If you are going through UI-BL-DAL, that's not a problem. Direct database
access should be extracted from the UI.
ahh ic...yeah nah thats how we are doing it...UI-BL-DAL..
>>
At current we just have one massive dataset which I use bindingsources to
attach to on the UI...

Really? That's kind of ugly. But it's all in one dataset in memory. What
happens when you have to update or insert records into a database?
Its ugly :) Very ugly...somewher e along the line I'd imagine I will be
forced to break it up, but for now it works well enough.

To persist it to the database I just loop through the dataset using
getchanges and execute an autogenerated sql statement for each one thats had
a change. It's not exactly efficient but it's working so far although I
*suspect* I will start having problems somewhere down the line...

It's on a webservice which complicated things, but getting all that stuff
working took me mroe time than I would have liked and I just figured I would
have been better off just paying for an ORM.

I guess put it this way; I don't feel 100% confident that im not going to
run into problems with my dataset architecture. I feel more confident with
an orm and custom objects because thats what seems to be what most blogs
live and die by, so I figure there must be a reason :)

Regards
John

Jun 27 '08 #10

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

5
1634
by: Brian Kiser | last post by:
What is Microsoft's stance on developing business objects vs datasets when creating n-tier apps. Is anyone doing business objects? It appears that most articles from MS recommend passing datasets between tiers but this seems to be a poor design decision in that I need to know about the database structure in each tier and I can't...
0
1686
by: Natehop | last post by:
I've been attempting to design an n-tiered framework leveraging .NET's strongly typed Dataset. My Framework will serve as the foundation to several client apps from Windows applications to web sites and web services. The architecture consists of a business rules tier, a data tier, and a common tier. The common tier contains my typed...
0
1405
by: Bj?rn Mor?n | last post by:
I am consuming a web service that returns arrays of classes which can contain other classes (a hierarchy of data). Is there a simple way to move the data into a typed DataSet without writing too much additional code? Observe that this web service does not return a DataSet explicitly, but I still want to handle the data as a DataSet at the...
3
1717
by: Rob Thomas | last post by:
Hi, I've been tasked to come up with a new architecture for a large application at one of my customer's sites. In the past, I have developed multi-tier applications whereby the business objects maintain the database using stored procedures etc and provide the data to the GUI layer via a set of objects and collections. After using the...
3
2066
by: pratham | last post by:
If i understand correct? is strong typed DataSet is ORM implementation by Microsoft? Expecting comments .. please Praveen
2
1709
by: pabloch2 | last post by:
Why the data access layer should use untyped datasets? and Why the business layer should use strongly typed datasets? Is this applicable to the 3 layered architecture in general or is it related with the implementation in .net? Can someone recommend me a good book to learn in depth the 3 layered architecture? Thanks.
4
9908
by: Ronald S. Cook | last post by:
I've always used untyped datasets. In a Microsoft course, it walks through creating typed datasets and harps on the benefits. It has you drag all these things around ..wizard, wizard, wizard... code gen, code gen, code gen. What's at the end looks slick, but then there's a ton of generated code that I'm going to have to maintain now. ...
25
2759
by: Penelope Dramas | last post by:
Hello, I'm in a front of very serious .net redesign/rewrite of an old VB6 application. I had been asked to make it .NET 2.0 and would like to ask couple of questions regarding data access as this application is heavily data-centric around MSDE database. Would it be better to use custom business objects or extend
4
4444
by: newtonwong | last post by:
I have a web reference WSDL, but it doesn't really create an XSD. I'm trying to generate datasets from the WSDL file but not sure how to do so. I successfully created the proxy class, but the WebServices all return/ send domain typed data, so I am seeing if I can turn these "classes"/ WSDL into Typed DataSets. Anyone have ideas on where...
0
7771
marktang
by: marktang | last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main...
0
7686
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language...
0
8198
jinu1996
by: jinu1996 | last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that...
1
7771
by: Hystou | last post by:
Overview: Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For...
0
5289
by: conductexam | last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one. At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert...
0
3730
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in...
0
3731
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
1
1296
muto222
by: muto222 | last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
0
1036
bsmnconsultancy
by: bsmnconsultancy | last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.