Any comments/ideas for a better performance

[{ Angelius }]

I decided that this forum doesn't deserve or appreciate my work and I am not going to support it by releasing/maintaining my work and generating traffic for it.

[CØĐ£Ř||Mã©hÍñє]

its near to impluse one but i think its good

[BaussHacker]

You got these:

        public Update Set(string column, object value)
        {
            UpdateString += column + "='" + value + "', ";
            return this;
        }
        public Update Where(string column, object value)
        {
            UpdateString = UpdateString.Remove(UpdateString.Length - 2, 2);
            UpdateString += " WHERE " + column + "='" + value + "'";
            return this;
        }

Where you could just do:

        public void Set(string column, object value)
        {
            UpdateString += column + "='" + value + "', ";
        }
        public void Where(string column, object value)
        {
            UpdateString = UpdateString.Remove(UpdateString.Length - 2, 2);
            UpdateString += " WHERE " + column + "='" + value + "'";
        }

Why?
Because there is no point returning something, that is already there.

[{ Angelius }]

Originally Posted by BaussHacker

You got these:

Where you could just do:

Why?
Because there is no point returning something, that is already there.

im aware of that but with out the return; any update command it'll look something like .

PHP Code:

//with return; will look like 
 SQL.Engine.Update("Table")
.Set("column", "value")
.Where("column", "value")
.Execute();

//with out the return; 
SQL.Engine.Update("Table").Set("column", "value");
SQL.Engine.Update("Table").Where("column", "value");
SQL.Engine.Update("Table").Execute();

//and each time you do 
SQL.Engine.Update("Table").etc  
//a new update command well be created . 


so i think the way it was makes more sense and it looks better too :P
its meant to be easier though , and the performance is the same in both cases .

[Korvacs]

Stored procedures, cached lookup, settings on the sql server etc.

[-impulse-]

Originally Posted by Korvacs

Stored procedures, cached lookup, settings on the sql server etc.

A good pooling system (already done by the mysql dev team) beside what Korvacs said and your mysql will rock. Don't limit yourself to one connection which may fail. All you have to do is study a bit about mysql's connection bug and connection string.

[{ Angelius }]

Originally Posted by Korvacs

Stored procedures, cached lookup, settings on the sql server etc.

i am on it .

Originally Posted by -impulse-

A good pooling system (already done by the mysql dev team) beside what Korvacs said and your mysql will rock. Don't limit yourself to one connection which may fail. All you have to do is study a bit about mysql's connection bug and connection string.

thanks impulse


but guys for a co Pserver should i keep the connection opened or close it once its done executing ?

[_DreadNought_]

Have a few connections should one die, pull another, add a new connection.

if (connected.Died)
{
         connected = GetNewConnectionFromSomewhere
         AddConnection to somewhere.
}

[-impulse-]

Ok, in case you didn't read this post, read it
^ last paragraph (the EDIT).

As long as you don't set the connection property 'pooling=false' you should dispose of your sql objects. Example:

using(MySqlConnection conn = new MySqlConnection(...)) { 
    conn.Open();
    using(MySqlCommand cmd = new MySqlCommand(QUERY, conn))
    {
        cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
    }
}

[{ Angelius }]

Originally Posted by _DreadNought_

Have a few connections should one die, pull another, add a new connection.

PHP Code:

public class Engine
    {
        private static MySqlConnection connection;
        private static EventHandler ConnectionWatcher = new EventHandler(RestartConnection);
        public Engine(MySqlConnection Connection)
        {
            connection = Connection;
            connection.Disposed += ConnectionWatcher;
        }
        private static void RestartConnection(Object sender, EventArgs e)
        {
            try
            {
                connection.Open();
                connection.Disposed += ConnectionWatcher;
                //Console.WriteLine(" ConnectionState: Connection has been closed but it's been reconnected Successfully");
            }
            catch { }
        }
} 


done the eventhandler takes care of the connection each time its disposed/closed by reconnecting it Immediately (takes up to 10 millisec's as max and then its connected )

Originally Posted by -impulse-

Ok, in case you didn't read this post, read it
^ last paragraph (the EDIT).

As long as you don't set the connection property 'pooling=false' you should dispose of your sql objects. Example:

PHP Code:

public void Execute()
{
   try
   {
    Query = "UPDATE " + table + " SET " + UpdateString;
    OpenConnection(connection);// to make sure that the connection is opened 
    using (MySqlCommand cmd = new MySqlCommand(Query, connection))
    {
      cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
    }
    }
    catch (Exception X) { Console.WriteLine(X.Message); }
}

private void OpenConnection()
{
   try
   {
      connection.Open();
   }
   catch {/*no need to catch any Exception as the Exception messag would be (already connected )*/ }
} 


that should try to open the connection but it may fail to open it as it may be already connected . the catch (will never throw an exception ) so it executes the query and dispose/clean everything .

but the question is . in failure cases say an exception was thrown .. what should i do with (the query to execute) so its not lost ?

[_DreadNought_]

10 milli sec's max? Oh dear, that doesnt sound good. If I was using mysql i'd be unhappy with that, mmm 5 max? Try have the connection param's already done. Maybe you could connect it and if they support a pause? Connect it, pause it, resume(which should really take a few ms) it and use it. But then again, im not a fanboy with mysql.

as for your question, Thats just it, personally if I was being tied up and slapped by a **** and had to use MySQL id have a list of waiting to execute querys. But that's why mysql isnt good, check out binary(hybrids SAFE binary class) or ini. They're both very good and binary is by FAAAR better then mysql. but if you like the style then mssql is always there.

[{ Angelius }]

Originally Posted by _DreadNought_

10 milli sec's max? Oh dear, that doesnt sound good. If I was using mysql i'd be unhappy with that, mmm 5 max? Try have the connection param's already done. Maybe you could connect it and if they support a pause? Connect it, pause it, resume(which should really take a few ms) it and use it. But then again, im not a fanboy with mysql.

as for your question, Thats just it, personally if I was being tied up and slapped by a dick and had to use MySQL id have a list of waiting to execute querys. But that's why mysql isnt good, check out binary(hybrids SAFE binary class) or ini. They're both very good and binary is by FAAAR better then mysql. but if you like the style then mssql is always there.

5 as max? well i guess its not my choice to make you have seen how the connection is being done and its being done the right way and when i said as max its been like (3 to 7 ms) but i have seen 10's .

public SqlEngine(string Host, string DataBase, string UserName, string Password)
{
string ConString = "SERVER=" + Host + ";" + "Persist Security Info=yes; Max Pool Size=25; Min Pool Size=5;" + "DATABASE=" + DataBase + ";" + "UID=" + UserName + ";" + "PASSWORD=" + Password + ";";
connection = new MySqlConnection(ConString);
}

just in case you dident see the ( connection = new MySqlConnection(ConString); ) part . im not creating a new connection with new passed param's every time i reconnect it . all it takes is (connection.open()

Connection pooling works by keeping the native connection to the server live when the client disposes of a MySqlConnection. Subsequently, if a new MySqlConnection object is opened, it will be created from the connection pool, rather than creating a new native connection. This improves performance.

To work as designed, it is best to let the connection pooling system manage all connections. You should not create a globally accessible instance of MySqlConnection and then manually open and close it. This interferes with the way the pooling works and can lead to unpredictable results or even exceptions.

so basically there is nothing wrong with the way its reconnecting .

and yes you are being tied up and slapped by a dick cus of 2 reasons .
1. a list ? list!! you gotta be kidding me
2. if hybrids said that the sky is green it doesent mean that it is green (it means that he was drunk)







etc

well facebook is having some hard times with mysql but its just due to the site massive data volume but...

they all uses mysql to store there data and mysql is not a bad choice for a privet server we just need to know how to use it .