Caching dimension and attribute details - asp.net-mvc-3

I am using ASP.NET MVC 3.0 and use ADOMD class to get the dimension names and attribute names. This is a heavy operation and multiple users are using this application.
I am wondering which is the best caching technique I can use? I want to create a dependency on SSAS cube. If cube is updated, I want to invalidate the cache.
Since I am using .net framework 4.0, i can also use System.Runtime.Caching
Possible options:
1. System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache
2. Enterprise library
3. System.Runtime.Caching
please suggest the best caching library.

System.Runtime.Caching is the defacto standard for caching. Enterprise library could be a little heavy for this kind of task but also worth exploring.

Related

Use redis cache with EF Core

guys.
I use EF Core with caching. The current cache realization needs objects to support the IMemoryCache interface.
But all distributed caches realized IDistributionCache and there is no direct way to say DbContext to use, for example, Redis Cache instead of an in-memory cache.
Are there any existing solutions for the Redis cache integration? Or I must realize my own proxy between IDistributionCache and IMemoryCache.
My current .NET version is the .NET 5.0 - preview 4.
Thank you.
I am looking into this also. You might want to look at
https://github.com/VahidN/EFCoreSecondLevelCacheInterceptor

Token based authentication using Dapper micro-orm

I am looking for tutorial or sample for Dapper using token based authentication in web api 2. I appreciate if anyone can suggest where to start, I have found tutorial in http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/UploadFile/ff2f08/token-based-authentication-using-Asp-Net-web-api-owin-and-i/ but the sample is using EF and I havent tried using EF, but dapper also I am using MySQL for my database. Thanks in advance and good day.
Dapper is a very different tool to EF (which is the DbContext described in your step 3 / step 4). It simply will not be compatible with those steps, and isn't designed to be used with those steps.
But here's the thing: dapper is just a tool. EF is just a tool. It is ok to use more than one tool. If it suits your purposes, then use EF to do one set of jobs (for example, to help you use a particular library that is designed with that in mind), and use another tool (such as dapper) elsewhere in the same project. That's OK. No one will mind.
If you really really don't want to use EF at all, then you'll need to find out everything that the library needs to support what you are doing, and implement it manually. If the library is designed around IQueryable<T> etc, then this may be very difficult.

Using the Entity Framework and ADO in a hybrid setting for transition?

We have an app in ASP.NET MVC 3 that, due to legacy and porting reasons, is written entirely using traditional ADO.NET for the data layer.
I am now tasked with adding some reporting to this website, and the reports can result in some extremely complicated queries.
Are there any pitfalls in using the EF Power Tools to reverse-engineer a code first model and using it side-by-side with our current ADO.NET model? Doing so would allow me to use LINQ for querying the data I need, greatly speeding up the time required to write each report. I would need to shut off data context initialization, as we have our current model do that, but are there any glaring risks or problems associated with trying to do this?
If it's of any relevance (I know EF 5 has a ton of new features), we are using .NET 4 and will begin moving to .NET 4.5 as soon as it launches.
I think this is a very sensible thing to do. You could also use a database-first model, which you can refresh whenever the database changes and which does not try to initialize a database.
Since you will use the context read-only you can optimize the query process by setting the MergeOption property of ObjectQuerys to MergeOption.NoTracking. This reduces overhead because the context will not track changes of the generated objects.
A problem might be that there is more maintenance if the database changes, but I think the absence of walls of boiler-plate query code for reporting on the old data layer far outweighs that.
One day :) you may even decide to use the EF model to display data that users want to filter in the UI and use the old data layer for CUD commands. (a bit like CQRS).

MVC and ORM as designing for asp.net web application

I have a asp.net project and Its in designing phase. Its about products and shops navigation system. Users can browse/search products. I want my web application to be extendable and flexible. What I initially planned was to make it an MVC and for database I propose ORM (Object Relational Mapping). Is that right? what could be the problems I face with this proposal. I am learning asp.net so I don't know much about the problems.What design do you people suggest?
It's great that you've decided to learn ASP.NET.
Regarding design approach, it sounds like your question is 2 part: a) MVC or traditional web forms ASP.NET, and b) ORM or no ORM.
a) Generally speaking, if you have a good programming background, I would recommend MVC over web forms for any consumer facing Internet product. It promotes testability, clear separation of concerns, and gives the developer finer grained control over the UI.
b) Regarding ORM or no ORM - first, its important to note that you still need to choose a database. ORM is merely a means of abstracting the data access logic away from the developer - but there still needs to be a database to store the data. If you're going with an all Microsoft stack, you'll probably choose SQL Server.
ORM is great for developer productivity - and generally speaking, there's no reason not to choose it for new projects unless you can identify up front that its not going to provide a productivity boost. An example reason why you would choose not to adopt ORM - you need to persist the data in a pre-defined format - or in an already existing database - and the persisted entities are not consistent with how your application is representing them (i.e. over-normalized). In this case, you may want to write your own data access logic, and not rely on an ORM.
Finally, if all you are looking to accomplish is putting a product catalog online, rather than building an application from scratch to do this - you may want to consider utilizing an existing CMS of some sort, or even use Wordpress with some plugins. Would save hours of time and still accomplish your stated goal.
Best of luck!
If you want a really good reference on how to build application using MVC and ORM, then read the following book : Professional ASP.NET Design Patterns
It explains in details as how to build application using MVC. It also covers other interesting topics like dependency injection, repository pattern(very important expecially if you have decided to go for ORM), TDD etc. I hope you will enjoy reading this text.

.NET Membership with Repository Pattern

My team is in the process of designing a domain model which will hide various different data sources behind a unified repository abstraction. One of the main drivers for this approach is the very high probability that these data sources will undergo significant change in the near future and we don't want to be re-writing business logic when this happens. One data source will be our membership database which was originally implemented using the default ASP.Net Membership Provider. The membership provider is tied to the System.Web.Security namespace but we have a design guideline requiring that our domain model layer is not dependent upon System.Web (or any other implementation/environment dependency) as it will be consumed in different environments - nor do we want our websites directly communicating with databases.
I am considering what would be a good approach to reconciling the MembershipProvider approach with our abstracted n-tier architecture. My initial feeling is that we could create a "DomainMembershipProvider" which interacts with the domain model and then implement objects in the model which deal with the repository and handle validation/business logic. The repository would then implement data access using our (as-yet undecided) ORM/data access tool.
Are there are any glaring holes in this approach - I haven't worked closely with the MembershipProvider class so may well be missing something. Alternatively, is there an approach that you think will better serve the requirements I described above?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts and advice.
Regards,
Zac
It's been 6 months since the question was asked and no one seems to have been able to provide an answer so I thought I'd explain the solution we eventually chose.
Basically, we have decided not to use any implementation of the MembershipProvider - instead we use our own custom Membership Service sitting atop a repository. It was important for us to maintain the existing aspnet_Membership database so our repository has basically duplicated the built-in SQLMembershipProvider functionality (at least, the aspects we need of it) - initially via Linq-to-SQL but now we're transitioning to NHibernate. The plan is to replace the membership database in a year or so when all of our websites are upgraded to use the new model.
It was possible to use a custom membership provider but in the end it became apparent that it was simpler, more consistent, and more maintainable to use a custom implementation. We are still using the built-in forms authentication functionality for verifying that a user is logged in and for redirecting users who try to access secure areas of our site without first being authenticated - but we have overridden the functionality that is tied to the profile provider.
Ultimately, our feelings on this are that while the membership provider is a powerful and easy-to-use tool within ASP.Net, if it doesn't fit with the wider approach used in your application, it is worth considering an alternative approach.
Interesting, thanks for posting your final solution. I am in a similar situation, but writing a custom Membershipprovider. I don't know where to put the provider because it needs access to the DB as well as System.Web namespace. It seems like it's the one class that violates this whole separation of concerns design.

Resources