Search Results

Search found 5410 results on 217 pages for 'n tier architecture'.

Page 2/217 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Software Architecture: Quality Attributes

    Quality is what all software engineers should strive for when building a new system or adding new functionality. Dictonary.com ambiguously defines quality as a grade of excellence. Unfortunately, quality must be defined within the context of a situation in that each engineer must extract quality attributes from a project’s requirements. Because quality is defined by project requirements the meaning of quality is constantly changing base on the project. Software architecture factors that indicate the relevance and effectiveness The relevance and effectiveness of architecture can vary based on the context in which it was conceived and the quality attributes that are required to meet. Typically when evaluating architecture for a specific system regarding relevance and effectiveness the following questions should be asked.   Architectural relevance and effectiveness questions: Does the architectural concept meet the needs of the system for which it was designed? Out of the competing architectures for a system, which one is the most suitable? If we look at the first question regarding meeting the needs of a system for which it was designed. A system that answers yes to this question must meet all of its quality goals. This means that it consistently meets or exceeds performance goals for the system. In addition, the system meets all the other required system attributers based on the systems requirements. The suitability of a system is based on several factors. In order for a project to be suitable the necessary resources must be available to complete the task. Standard Project Resources: Money Trained Staff Time Life cycle factors that affect the system and design The development life cycle used on a project can drastically affect how a system’s architecture is created as well as influence its design. In the case of using the software development life cycle (SDLC) each phase must be completed before the next can begin.  This waterfall approach does not allow for changes in a system’s architecture after that phase is completed. This can lead to major system issues when the architecture for the system is not as optimal because of missed quality attributes. This can occur when a project has poor requirements and makes misguided architectural decisions to name a few examples. Once the architectural phase is complete the concepts established in this phase must move on to the design phase that is bound to use the concepts and guidelines defined in the previous phase regardless of any missing quality attributes needed for the project. If any issues arise during this phase regarding the selected architectural concepts they cannot be corrected during the current project. This directly has an effect on the design of a system because the proper qualities required for the project where not used when the architectural concepts were approved. When this is identified nothing can be done to fix the architectural issues and system design must use the existing architectural concepts regardless of its missing quality properties because the architectural concepts for the project cannot be altered. The decisions made in the design phase then preceded to fall down to the implementation phase where the actual system is coded based on the approved architectural concepts established in the architecture phase regardless of its architectural quality. Conversely projects using more of an iterative or agile methodology to implement a system has more flexibility to correct architectural decisions based on missing quality attributes. This is due to each phase of the SDLC is executed more than once so any issues identified in architecture of a system can be corrected in the next architectural phase. Subsequently the corresponding changes will then be adjusted in the following design phase so that when the project is completed the optimal architectural and design decision are applied to the solution. Architecture factors that indicate functional suitability Systems that have function shortcomings do not have the proper functionality based on the project’s driving quality attributes. What this means in English is that the system does not live up to what is required of it by the stakeholders as identified by the missing quality attributes and requirements. One way to prevent functional shortcomings is to test the project’s architecture, design, and implementation against the project’s driving quality attributes to ensure that none of the attributes were missed in any of the phases. Another way to ensure a system has functional suitability is to certify that all its requirements are fully articulated so that there is no chance for misconceptions or misinterpretations by all stakeholders. This will help prevent any issues regarding interpreting the system requirements during the initial architectural concept phase, design phase and implementation phase. Consider the applicability of other architectural models When considering an architectural model for a project is also important to consider other alternative architectural models to ensure that the model that is selected will meet the systems required functionality and high quality attributes. Recently I can remember talking about a project that I was working on and a coworker suggested a different architectural approach that I had never considered. This new model will allow for the same functionally that is offered by the existing model but will allow for a higher quality project because it fulfills more quality attributes. It is always important to seek alternatives prior to committing to an architectural model. Factors used to identify high-risk components A high risk component can be defined as a component that fulfills 2 or more quality attributes for a system. An example of this can be seen in a web application that utilizes a remote database. One high-risk component in this system is the TCIP component because it allows for HTTP connections to handle by a web server and as well as allows for the server to also connect to a remote database server so that it can import data into the system. This component allows for the assurance of data quality attribute and the accessibility quality attribute because the system is available on the network. If for some reason the TCIP component was to fail the web application would fail on two quality attributes accessibility and data assurance in that the web site is not accessible and data cannot be update as needed. Summary As stated previously, quality is what all software engineers should strive for when building a new system or adding new functionality. The quality of a system can be directly determined by how closely it is implemented when compared to its desired quality attributes. One way to insure a higher quality system is to enforce that all project requirements are fully articulated so that no assumptions or misunderstandings can be made by any of the stakeholders. By doing this a system has a better chance of becoming a high quality system based on its quality attributes

    Read the article

  • 3-Tier architecture-layering and the term-mishmash

    - by Rookian
    Hi! I am confused about the different possibilities to express a 3-Tier architecture. Data-Access-Layer Business-Layer Presentation Layer (User Interface) or Database (aka Backend) Business-Layer Presentation Layer (User Interface) Why can you skip the database in the 1st approach? Both use a database! Does the database belong to the layering or not?! What is wrong and what is right? Can someone of you clarify this :)? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • General N-Tier Architecture Question

    - by whatispunk
    In an N-Tier app you're supposed to have a business logic layer and a data access layer. Is it bad to simply have two assemblies: BusinessLogicLayer.dll and DataAccessLayer.dll to handle all this logic? How do you actually represent these layers. It seems silly, the way I've seen it, to have a BusinessLogic class library containing classes like: CustomerBusinessLogic.cs, OrderBusinessLogic.cs, etc. each calling their appropriately named cousin in the DataAccessLayer class library, i.e. CustomerDataAccess.cs, OrderDataAccess.cs. I want to create a web app using MVP and it doesn't seem so cut and dry as this. There are lots of opinions about where the business logic is supposed to be put in MVP and I'm not sure I've found a really great answer yet. I want this project to be easily testable, and I am trying to adhere to TDD methodologies as best I can. I intend to use MSTest and Rhino Mocks for testing. I was thinking of something like the following for my architecture: I'd use LINQ-To-SQL to talk to the database. WCF services to define data contract interfaces for the business logic layer. Then use MVP with ASP.NET Forms for the UI/BLL. Now, this isn't the start of this project, most of the LINQ stuff is already done, so its stuck. The WCF service would replace the existing DataAccessLayer assembly and the UI/BLL would replace the BusinessLogicLayer assembly etc. This sort of makes sense in my head, but its getting really late. Anyone that's traveled down this path have any guidance? Good links? Warnings? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • 3-Tier Architecture in asp.net

    - by Aamir Hasan
    Three-tier (layer) is a client-server architecture in which the user interface, business process (business rules) and data storage and data access are developed and maintained as independent modules or most often on separate platforms. Basically, there are 3 layers, tier 1 (presentation tier, GUI tier), tier 2 (business objects, business logic tier) and tier 3 (data access tier). These tiers can be developed and tested separately. 3 - Tier Architecture is like following : 1. Presentation Layer 2.Data Manager Layer 3. Data Access Layer  The communication between all these layers need to be done using Business Entities. 1. Presentation Layer is the one where the UI comes into picture 2. Data Manager Layer is the one where all the maipulative code is written. Basically in this layer all the functional code needs to mentioned. 3. Data Access Layer is the one which communicates directly to the database. Data from one layer to other needs to be tranformed using Entities.

    Read the article

  • Architecture guidelines for a "single page web-app"

    - by Matt Roberts
    I'm going to start a side project to build a "single page" web application. The application needs to be real-time, sending updates to the clients as changes happen. Are there any good resources for best-practice approaches wrt the architecture for these kinds of applications. The best resource I've found so far is the trello architecture article here: http://blog.fogcreek.com/the-trello-tech-stack/ To me, this architecture, although very sexy, is probably over-engineered for my specific needs - although I do have similar requirements. I'm wondering if I need to bother with a sub/pub at the server side, could I not just push updates from the server when something happens (e.g. when the client sends an update to the server, write the update to the db, and then send an update to the clients). Tech-wise, I'm probably looking to build this out in Node.JS or maybe Ruby, although the architecture guidelines should to some extent apply to any underlying server technologies.

    Read the article

  • Good Software Architecture book or material?

    - by Inder Kumar Rathore
    I am a programmer and there is always a word going around about the architecture of the application/software. I want to gain some knowledge about how to develop good architecture. I know it is something that comes with the experience but I need some start so that I can practice it and get some good experience. So Please refer a good book for architecture. I know "Head first design patterns" is there, should I go for it or is there some good books also. Thanks

    Read the article

  • When to use Aspect Oriented Architecture (AOA/AOD)

    When is it appropriate to use aspect oriented architecture? I think the only honest answer to this question is that it depends on the context for which the question is being asked. There really are no hard and fast rules regarding the selection of an architectural model(s) for a project because each model provides good and bad benefits. Every system is built with a unique requirements and constraints. This context will dictate when to use one type of architecture over another or in conjunction with others. To me aspect oriented architecture models should be a sub-phase in the architectural modeling and design process especially when creating enterprise level models. Personally, I like to use this approach to create a base architectural model that is defined by non-functional requirements and system quality attributes.   This general model can then be used as a starting point for additional models because it is targets all of the business key quality attributes required by the system.Aspect oriented architecture is a method for modeling non-functional requirements and quality attributes of a system known as aspects. These models do not deal directly with specific functionality. They do categorize functionality of the system. This approach allows a system to be created with a strong emphasis on separating system concerns into individual components. These cross cutting components enables a systems to create with compartmentalization in regards to non-functional requirements or quality attributes.  This allows for the reduction in code because an each component maintains an aspect of a system that can be called by other aspects. This approach also allows for a much cleaner and smaller code base during the implementation and support of a system. Additionally, enabling developers to develop systems based on aspect-oriented design projects will be completed faster and will be more reliable because existing components can be shared across a system; thus, the time needed to create and test the functionality is reduced.   Example of an effective use of Aspect Oriented ArchitectureIn my experiences, aspect oriented architecture can be very effective with large or more complex systems. Typically, these types of systems have a large number of concerns so the act of defining them is very beneficial for reducing the system’s complexity because components can be developed to address each concern while exposing functionality to the other system components. The benefits to using the aspect oriented approach as the starting point for a system is that it promotes communication between IT and the business due to the fact that the aspect oriented models are quality attributes focused so not much technical understanding is needed to understand the model.An example of this can be in developing a new intranet website. Common Intranet Concerns: Error Handling Security Logging Notifications Database connectivity Example of a not as effective use of Aspect Oriented ArchitectureAgain in my experiences, aspect oriented architecture is not as effective with small or less complex systems in comparison.  There is no need to model concerns for a system that has a limited amount of them because the added overhead would not be justified for the actual benefits of creating the aspect oriented architecture model.  Furthermore, these types of projects typically have a reduced time schedule and a limited budget.  The creation of the Aspect oriented models would increase the overhead of a project and thus increase the time needed to implement the system. An example of this is seen by creating a small application to poll a network share for new files and then FTP them to a new location.  The two primary concerns for this project is to monitor a network drive and FTP files to a new location.  There is no need to create an aspect model for this system because there will never be a need to share functionality amongst either of these concerns.  To add to my point, this system is so small that it could be created with just a few classes so the added layer of componentizing the concerns would be complete overkill for this situation. References:Brichau, Johan; D'Hondt, Theo. (2006) Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD) - An Introduction. Retreived from: http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~jbrichau/courses/introductionToAOSD.pdf

    Read the article

  • Architecture/pattern resources for small applications and tools

    - by s73v3r
    I was wondering if anyone had any resources or advice related to using architecture patterns like MVVM/MVC/MVP/etc on small applications and tools, as opposed to large, enterprisy ones. EDIT: Most of the information I see on application architecture is directed at large, enterprise applications. I'm just writing small programs and tools. As far as using these architecture patterns, is it generally worthwhile to go through the overhead of using an MVC/MVVM framework? Or would I be better off keeping it simple?

    Read the article

  • Simple Architecture Verification

    - by Jean Carlos Suárez Marranzini
    I just made an architecture for an application with the function of scoring, saving and loading tennis games. The architecture has 2 kinds of elements: components & layers. Components: Standalone elements that can be consumed by other components or by layers. They might also consume functionality from the model/bottom layer. Layers: Software components whose functionality rests on previous layers (except for the model layer). -Layers: -Models: Data and it's behavior. -Controllers: A layer that allows interaction between the views and the models. -Views: The presentation layer for interacting with the user. -Components: -Persistence: Makes sure the game data can be stored away for later retrieval. -Time Machine: Records changes in the game through time so it's possible to navigate the game back and forth. -Settings: Contains the settings that determine how some of the game logic will apply. -Game Engine: Contains all the game logic, which it applies to the game data to determine the path the game should take. This is an image of the architecture (I don't have enough rep to post images): http://i49.tinypic.com/35lt5a9.png The requierements which this architecture should satisfy are the following: Save & load games. Move through game history and see how the scoreboard changes as the game evolves. Tie-breaks must be properly managed. Games must be classified by hit-type. Every point can be modified. Match name and player names must be stored. Game logic must be configurable by the user. I would really appreciate any kind of advice or comments on this architecture. To see if it is well built and makes sense as a whole. I took the idea from this link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model%E2%80%93view%E2%80%93controller

    Read the article

  • Software Design Idea for multi tier architecture

    - by Preyash
    I am currently investigating multi tier architecture design for a web based application in MVC3. I already have an architecture but not sure if its the best I can do in terms of extendability and performance. The current architecure has following components DataTier (Contains EF POCO objects) DomainModel (Contains Domain related objects) Global (Among other common things it contains Repository objects for CRUD to DB) Business Layer (Business Logic and Interaction between Data and Client and CRUD using repository) Web(Client) (which talks to DomainModel and Business but also have its own ViewModels for Create and Edit Views for e.g.) Note: I am using ValueInjector for convering one type of entity to another. (which is proving an overhead in this desing. I really dont like over doing this.) My question is am I having too many tiers in the above architecure? Do I really need domain model? (I think I do when I exposes my Business Logic via WCF to external clients). What is happening is that for a simple database insert it (1) create ViewModel (2) Convert ViewModel to DomainModel for Business to understand (3) Business Convert it to DataModel for Repository and then data comes back in the same order. Few things to consider, I am not looking for a perfect architecure solution as it does not exits. I am looking for something that is scalable. It should resuable (for e.g. using design patterns ,interfaces, inheritance etc.) Each Layers should be easily testable. Any suggestions or comments is much appriciated. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Tap Into Tier 1 ERP

    - by Christine Randle
    By: Larry Simcox, Senior Director, Accelerate Corporate Programs     Your customers aren’t satisfied with so-so customer service. Your employees aren’t happy with below average salaries.   So why would you settle for second-rate or tier 2 ERP?   A recent report from Nucleus Research found that usability improvements and rapid implementation tools are simplifying deployments, putting tier 1 enterprise applications well within reach for midsize companies. So how can your business tap into the power of tier 1 ERP? And what are the best ways to manage a deployment?   The Reputation of ERP Implementations Overhauling internal operations and implementing ERP can be a challenging endeavor for organizations of all sizes. Midsize companies often shy away from enterprise-class ERP, fearing complexity, limited resources and perceived challenging deployments. Many forward thinking executives experienced ERP implementations in the late 90s and early 2000s and embrace a strategy to grow their business by investing in a foundation for innovation and growth via ERP modernization projects.   In recent years there has been a strong consumerization of IT with enterprise applications and their delivery methods evolving to become more user-friendly.  Today, usability improvements and modern implementation tools have made top-tier ERP solutions more accessible for growing companies. Nucleus found that because enterprise-class software can now be rapidly deployed, the payback is quicker, the risks are lower, the software is less disruptive and overall, companies can differentiate themselves from their competitors and achieve more success with the advantages these types of systems deliver.   Tapping into the power of tier 1 ERP can be made much easier with Oracle Accelerate solutions. Created by Oracle's expert partners and reviewed by Oracle, Oracle Accelerate solutions are simple to deploy, industry-specific, packaged solutions that provide a fast time to benefit, which means getting the right solution in place quickly, inexpensively with a controlled scope and predictable returns.   How are growing midsize companies successfully deploying tier 1 ERP? According to Nucleus Research, companies can increase success in their tier 1 ERP deployments by limiting customization, planning a rapid go-live, bettering communication across departments, and considering different delivery options. Oracle Accelerate solutions incorporate industry best practices and encourage rapid deployments. And even more, Nucleus found customers deploying tier 1 ERP with Oracle that had used Oracle Business Accelerators, Oracle’s rapid implementation tools, reduced the time to deploy Oracle E-Business Suite by at least 50 percent.   Industrial manufacturer L.H. Dottie is one company that needed ERP with enhanced capabilities to support its growth and streamline business processes. Using out-of-the-box configuration of Oracle E-Business Suite modules (provided by Oracle Business Accelerators and delivered by Oracle Partner C3 Business Solutions), L.H. Dottie was able to speed its implementation and went live in just six and a half months. With tier 1 ERP, the company was able to grow and do its business better, automating a variety of processes, accelerating product delivery and gaining powerful data analysis capabilities that helped drive its business into further regions. See more details about their ERP implementation here.   Tier 1 enterprise-class applications have proven to boost the success of Oracle’s midsize customers. As Nucleus Research iterates, companies poised for growth or seeking to compete against larger competitors absolutely can tap into the power of tier 1 ERP and position themselves as enterprise-class through leveraging Oracle Accelerate solutions.   You can learn more here about The Evolving Business Case for Tier - 1 ERP in Midsize Companies in our exclusive webcast with Nucleus.   ###  

    Read the article

  • N-Tier Architecture - Structure with multiple projects in VB.NET

    - by focus.nz
    I would like some advice on the best approach to use in the following situation... I will have a Windows Application and a Web Application (presentation layers), these will both access a common business layer. The business layer will look at a configuration file to find the name of the dll (data layer) which it will create a reference to at runtime (is this the best approach?). The reason for creating the reference at runtime to the data access layer is because the application will interface with a different 3rd party accounting system depending on what the client is using. So I would have a separate data access layer to support each accounting system. These could be separate setup projects, each client would use one or the other, they wouldn't need to switch between the two. Projects: MyCompany.Common.dll - Contains interfaces, all other projects have a reference to this one. MyCompany.Windows.dll - Windows Forms Project, references MyCompany.Business.dll MyCompany.Web.dll - Website project, references MyCompany.Business.dll MyCompany.Busniess.dll - Business Layer, references MyCompany.Data.* (at runtime) MyCompany.Data.AccountingSys1.dll - Data layer for accounting system 1 MyCompany.Data.AccountingSys2.dll - Data layer for accounting system 2 The project MyCompany.Common.dll would contain all the interfaces, each other project would have a reference to this one. Public Interface ICompany ReadOnly Property Id() as Integer Property Name() as String Sub Save() End Interface Public Interface ICompanyFactory Function CreateCompany() as ICompany End Interface The project MyCompany.Data.AccountingSys1.dll and MyCompany.Data.AccountingSys2.dll would contain the classes like the following: Public Class Company Implements ICompany Protected _id As Integer Protected _name As String Public ReadOnly Property Id As Integer Implements MyCompany.Common.ICompany.Id Get Return _id End Get End Property Public Property Name As String Implements MyCompany.Common.ICompany.Name Get Return _name End Get Set(ByVal value as String) _name = value End Set End Property Public Sub Save() Implements MyCompany.Common.ICompany.Save Throw New NotImplementedException() End Sub End Class Public Class CompanyFactory Implements ICompanyFactory Public Function CreateCompany() As ICompany Implements MyCompany.Common.ICompanyFactory.CreateCompany Return New Company() End Function End Class The project MyCompany.Business.dll would provide the business rules and retrieve data form the data layer: Public Class Companies Public Shared Function CreateCompany() As ICompany Dim factory as New MyCompany.Data.CompanyFactory Return factory.CreateCompany() End Function End Class Any opinions/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • "cloud architecture" concepts in a system architecture diagrams

    - by markus
    If you design a distributed application for easy scale-out, or you just want to make use of any of the new “cloud computing” offerings by Amazon, Google or Microsoft, there are some typical concepts or components you usually end up using: distributed blob storage (aka S3) asynchronous, durable message queues (aka SQS) non-Relational-/non-transactional databases (like SimpleDB, Google BigTable, Azure SQL Services) distributed background worker pool load-balanced, edge-service processes handling user requests (often virtualized) distributed caches (like memcached) CDN (content delivery network like Akamai) Now when it comes to design and sketch an architecture that makes use of such patterns, are there any commonly used symbols I could use? Or even a download with some cool Visio stencils? :) It doesn’t have to be a formal system like UML but I think it would be great if there were symbols that everyone knows and understands, like we have commonly used shapes for databases or a documents, for example. I think it would be important to not mix it up with traditional concepts like a normal file system (local or network server/SAN), or a relational database. Simply speaking, I want to be able to draw some conclusions about an application’s scalability or data consistency issues by just looking at the system architecture overview diagram. Update: Thank you very much for your answers. I like the idea of putting a small "cloud symbol" on the traditional symbols. However I leave this thread open just in case someone will find specific symbols (maybe in a book or so) - or uploaded some pimped up Visio stencils ;)

    Read the article

  • Relationship between TDD and Software Architecture/Design

    - by Christopher Francisco
    I'm new to TDD and have been reading the theory since applying it is more complicated than it sounds when you're learning by yourself. As far as I know, the objective is to write test cases for each requirement and run the test so it fails (to prevent a false positive). Afterward, you should write the minimum amount of code that can pass the test and move to the next one. That being said, is it true that you get a fast development, but what about the code itself? this theory makes me think you are not considering things like abstraction, delegation of responsibilities, design patterns, architecture and others since you're just writing "the minimum amount of code that can pass the test". I know I'm probably wrong because if this were true, we'd have a lot of crappy developers with poor software architecture and documentation so I'm asking for a guide here, what's the relationship between TDD and Software Architecture/Design?

    Read the article

  • Model Driven Architecture Approach in programming / modelling

    - by yak
    I know the basics of the model driven architecture: it is all about model the system which I want to create and create the core code afterwards. I used CORBA a while ago. First thing that I needed to do was to create an abstract interface (some kind of model of the system I want to build) and generate core code later. But I have a different question: is model driven architecture a broad approach or not? I mean, let's say, that I have the language (modelling language) in which I want to model EXISTING system (opposite to the system I want to CREATE), and then analyze the model of the created system and different facts about that modeled abstraction. In this case, can the process I described above be considered the model driven architecture approach? I mean, I have the model, but this is the model of the existing system, not the system to be created.

    Read the article

  • Carpool logical architecture

    - by enrmarc
    I'm designing a carpool system (drivers can publish their routes and passengers can subscribe to them) with WebServices(axis2) and Android clients (ksoap2). I have been having problems with the logical architecture of the system and I wondered if this architecture is fine. And another question: for that architecture (if it is ok), how would be the packages structure? I suppose something like that: (In android) package org.carpool.presentation *All the activities here (and maybe mvc pattern) (In the server) package org.carpool.services *Public interfaces (for example: register(User user), publishRoute(Route route) ) package org.carpool.domain *Pojos (for example: User.java, Route.java, etc) package org.carpool.persistence *Dao Interface and implementation (jdbc or hibernate)

    Read the article

  • Help me classify this type of software architecture

    - by Alex Burtsev
    I read some books about software architecture as we are using it in our project but I can't classify the architecture properly. It's some kind of Enterprise Architecture, but what exactly... SOA, ESB (Enterprise Service Bus), Message Bus, Event Driven SOA, there are so many terms in Enterprise software.... The system is based on custom XML messages exchanges between services. (it's not SOAP, nor any other XML based standard, just plain XML). These messages represent notifications (state changes) that are applied to the Domain model, (it's not like CRUD when you serialize the whole domain object, and pass it to service for persistence). The system is centralized, and system participants use different programming languages and frameworks (c++, c#, java). Also, messages are not processed at the moment they are received as they are stored first and the treatment begins on demand. It's called SOA+EDA -:)

    Read the article

  • Automated architecture validation

    - by P.Brian.Mackey
    I am aware of the fact that TFS 2010 ultimate edition can create and validate architecture diagrams. For example, I can create a new modeling project add Layer Diagram Add Layer called View Add BL Layer Add DL layer. Then I can validate this architecture as part of the build process when someone tries to check code into TFS. In other words, if the View references the DL then the compilation process will fail and the checkin will not be allowed. For those without an MSDN ultimate license, can FxCop or some 3rd party utility be used to validate architecture in an automated fashion? I prefer a TFS install-able plugin, but a local VS plugin will do.

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework in layered architecture

    - by Kamyar
    I am using a layered architecture with the Entity Framework. Here's What I came up with till now (All the projects Except UI are class library): Entities: The POCO Entities. Completely persistence ignorant. No Reference to other projects. Generated by Microsoft's ADO.Net POCO Entity Generator. DAL: The EDMX (Entity Model) file with the context class. (t4 generated). References: Entities BLL: Business Logic Layer. Will implement repository pattern on this layer. References: Entities, DAL. This is where the objectcontext gets populated: var ctx=new DAL.MyDBEntities(); UI: The presentation layer: ASP.NET website. References: Entities, BLL + a connection string entry to entities in the config file (question #2). Now my three questions: Is my layer discintion approach correct? In my UI, I access BLL as follows: var customerRep = new BLL.CustomerRepository(); var Customer = customerRep.GetByID(myCustomerID); The problem is that I have to define the entities connection string in my UI's web.config/app.config otherwise I get a runtime exception. IS defining the entities connectionstring in UI spoils the layers' distinction? Or is it accesptible in a muli layered architecture. Should I take any additional steps to perform chage tracking, lazy loading, etc (by etc I mean the features that Entity Framework covers in a conventional, 1 project, non POCO code generation)? Thanks and apologies for the lengthy question.

    Read the article

  • Where do objects merge/join data in a 3-tier model?

    - by BerggreenDK
    Its probarbly a simple 3-tier problem. I just want to make sure we use the best practice for this and I am not that familiary with the structures yet. We have the 3 tiers: GUI: ASP.NET for Presentation-layer (first platform) BAL: Business-layer will be handling the logic on a webserver in C#, so we both can use it for webforms/MVC + webservices DAL: LINQ to SQL in the Data-layer, returning BusinessObjects not LINQ. DB: The SQL will be Microsoft SQL-server/Express (havent decided yet). Lets think of setup where we have a database of [Persons]. They can all have multiple [Address]es and we have a complete list of all [PostalCode] and corresponding citynames etc. The deal is that we have joined a lot of details from other tables. {Relations}/[tables] [Person]:1 --- N:{PersonAddress}:M --- 1:[Address] [Address]:N --- 1:[PostalCode] Now we want to build the DAL for Person. How should the PersonBO look and when does the joins occure? Is it a business-layer problem to fetch all citynames and possible addressses pr. Person? or should the DAL complete all this before returning the PersonBO to the BAL ? Class PersonBO { public int ID {get;set;} public string Name {get;set;} public List<AddressBO> {get;set;} // Question #1 } // Q1: do we retrieve the objects before returning the PersonBO and should it be an Array instead? or is this totally wrong for n-tier/3-tier?? Class AddressBO { public int ID {get;set;} public string StreetName {get;set;} public int PostalCode {get;set;} // Question #2 } // Q2: do we make the lookup or just leave the PostalCode for later lookup? Can anyone explain in what order to pull which objects? Constructive criticism is very welcome. :o)

    Read the article

  • S#arp Architecture 1.5 released

    - by AlecWhittington
    The past two weeks have been wonderful for me, spending 12 days on Oahu, Hawaii. Then followed up with the S#arp Architecture 1.5 release. It has been a short 4 months since taking over as the project lead and this is my first major milestone. With this release, we advance S# even more forward with the ASP.NET MVC 2 enhancements. What's is S#? Pronounced "Sharp Architecture," this is a solid architectural foundation for rapidly building maintainable web applications leveraging the ASP.NET MVC framework...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Sharp Architecture 1.9.5 Released

    - by AlecWhittington
    The S#arp Architecture team is proud to announce the release of version 1.9.5. This version has had the following changes: Upgraded to MVC 3 RTM Solution upgraded to .NET 4 Implementation of IDependencyResolver provided, but not implemented This marks the last scheduled release of 1.X for S#arp Architecture . The team is working hard to get the 2.0 release out the door and we hope to have a preview of that coming soon. With regards to IDependencyResolver, we have provided an implementation, but have...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Architecture diagram of a computer virus

    - by Shiraz Bhaiji
    I am looking for an architecture diagram of a computer virus. Does anyone have a link to a good example? Edit Looks like I am getting hammered with downvotes. I agree that there is no single architecture for a virus. But somethings must be included for a program to be a virus. Example for components in the SAD: Replication method Trigger Payload Hosts targeted Vulnerabilities targeted Anti detection method

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >