We are using asp.net ajax 1.1 (and can't upgrade to latest for internal known reasons). We are having a page where we call ScriptService method through ASP.Net ajax and oncallback of result, we bind that result to Html controls on the page. During testing we observed that this whole process is taking too much time. When we profiled using IE8 developer toolbar, we observed that there is one standard function from ASP.net Ajax frameworks' own JS. Function name is function$_validateParameterType and it is the one which takes maximum time amongs others.
Is there any way we can reduce the time take by this. Is there any standard practice for such requirements.
Thanks,
Subhash
Oh, I figured it out.. Basically these functions are used mostly when we are running into debug mode. These checks are not there when running on Release mode. So i recompiled in release mode and then observed the profile output, now these functions do not appear at all..
That was very good to understand ..
Related
I found many languages provides some way to change code runtime. Many people ask queries regarding how to change code in this or that language runtime. Here I mean by change code is that rewrite code itself at runtime by using reflection or something else.
I have around 6 year of experience in Java application development. I never come again any problem where I have to change code at time.
Can anyone explain why we require to change code at runtime?
I have experienced three huge benefits of changing code at runtime:
Fixing bugs in a production environment without shutting down the application server. This allowed us to fix bugs on just some part of the application without interrupting the whole system.
Possibility of changing the business rule without having to deploy a new version of the application. A quicker deploy of features.
Writing unit test is easier. For example, you can mock dependencies, add some desired behaviour to some objects and etc. Spock Framework does well this.
Of course, we had this benefits because we have a very well defined development process on how to proceed on this situations.
At times you may need to call a method based on the input, that was received earlier in the program.
It could be used for dynamic calculation of value based on the key index, where every key is calculated in a different way or calculation requires fetching required data from different sources. Instead of using switch statement you can invoke a method dynamically using methodName+indexOfTheKey.
For many years I have had an objective of moving out of ASP/VBScript to a "better" language - my preference would be C# as I have skills in C - but I would consider other languages too (including PHP etc. so not just DotNet)
Objective is to have the code base in a language which does more for us. I hate the lack of data typing in VBScript, I would like a number of different "container objects" - rather than just a Dictionary Object, and so on - in fact I wonder why, having moved from Basic to C in the 80's, and then C++ a while after that, I managed to move "back" to Basic in to 00's.
(I could program the container objects in VBScript, but my instinct is that they would be slow in operation; we have a significant cache of "snippets" of HTML used in the rendering of the page, the ASP Application Object is a pretty blunt instrument!)
My ASP/VBScript is a single large application that is basically an "engine" to deliver web content.
It has been many years in the making, and now the ASP code changes seldom. (So I do need to justify moving it at all, or just living with VBScript "for ever")
It is driven from data in an MS SQL database.
There is only one .ASP page (made up of several include files).
Based on the query string parameters Skin and CMS templates for the page are loaded from database and suitable database Sprocs are run to acquire data which is merged into the CMS templates.
Data about the page (methods to use, etc.) is also retrieved from the database, along with details of access permissions and so on.
From what I have read some these things may make migration easier:
ASP sessions are not used - a session cookie is used to retrieve session data from the DB (so I could easily share a session half-and-half with ASPX
The VBScript uses OPTION EXPLICIT throughout, so all variables are predefined.
All output is via Response.Write (in fact most content is merged into a single variable and then output). There is no mix of HTML and <% server code %>.
I have some VBScript classes, but not many.
I have lots of VBScript functions, and a few Subroutines.
I have a test suite. This catches screen shots from the browser and graphically compares them with master images - thus I have the ability to do a regression test.
I don't have the resource to do a complete rewrite; maintenance of the existing code needs to continue during migration; but having said that 99% of our work is in CMS or SQL Sprocs, so the changes to ASP code are infrequent.
I have read of MS's utility to migrate ASP code to VB.NET. Given that my code is 100% VBScript and no mix of HTML/Script I would appreciate opinions on whether this would help me a lot or a little?
I would be happy to refactor STAYING IN VBscript with a view to making the migration to DotNet easier later on (but I'd need to know what my objectives were in doing that :) ). I could, for example, move some/all the functions to a COM object, and could probably do that piecemeal?
Thanks for your help
I have a large ASP classic intranet that I was maintaining until last year, and it was getting old, but new pieces were still being added in ASP classic because there was so much library code invested already. You already have a good setup if you are not changing the ASP code often and have some form of testing in place. (I have to admit it's the first time I have heard of the screenshot approach). If everything is driven off the DataBase and working. don't break it.
PHP will give you same problem of variant types, but will give you a world of options and choices that makes ASP classic seem like a childs toy. Out the box PHP does everything I've ever needed to do.
ASP.net is a BIG framework. Understanding it properly and fully is not an easy task, and it surprises me very often. it tries to do things for developers coming from a forms environment automatically that get very obtrusive when you come from a very precise rendering methodology like you sound you have. I found myself fighting the technology all the time, until ASP.net MVC came around. It fit my mind better because of how it worked and did what I asked it to, and nothing more. C# is an awesome language, with brilliant features and the DOT.net framework lets you do anything, if you can just find the right pieces. There is so much of it you will find yourself occasionally writing something that has been done in the framework already, only to find it just after finishing your own implementation.
Actually migrating could lead to some interesting problems. Even though you CAN run a ASP.net page much like an ASP classic page, you will loose many of the benefits of the environment as it is intended. That being said, I did do some test towards looking at migrating the site in question to ASP.net and managed to find ways around most of the stumbling blocks and reached the conclusion that such a migration would in fact be "mere work". The sheer quantity of man-hours it would take to do such a migration though made the undertaking infeasible.
Personally I would not suggest such a migration unless you have a few ASP.net projects under you belt successfully and are aware of the gotchas that asp.net brings with-it.
I have not seen the ASP to ASP.net conversion tool you speak of, but would love to get a link to it.
If you are staying in VBScript and are not aware of the AXE (ASP Xtreme Evolution) project here I can highly suggest looking into it for inspiration on getting past/around several of the ASP classic "limitations" and for the library of functionality it provides.
If you are looking for a way to justify the project to management, it will become increasingly more difficult to find classic ASP developers to continue maintaining the application. Any developer that has a choice would probably not choose to maintain an application built using VBScript. Developers that do take the job might consider it temporary and continue to look for other work.
Although I haven't heard anything from Microsoft, it can't be too many years before they decide to retire classic ASP entirely.
I am currently trying to use the "Invocation tags" of Mate to call my web services and delegate the WS-responses to my fault/result handlers.
I want to use the generated proxies, provided by the Flex Builder, and not the plain <WebService> or <WebServiceInvoker> tags.
I actually failed using several techniques:
<WebServiceInvoker> does not work with the generated proxies.
<AsyncMethodInvoker> needs some complicated successType that I could not get to work with the WS-calls. And defining the events seems redundant to me. I want it simple and easy to read, the code will be touched by other people than me!
<MethodInvoker> can't use instances, and it also can't handle the proxies' AsyncToken
<DelegateInvoker> Looked fine at first. It calls the service but doesn't fire valid result events (infinite busy cursor). Even though i can successfully bind to the XYZ_lastResult of the WS-proxies, and a WS-call results in getting valid data from the WS-backend, the <faultHandlers> and <resulthandlers> are not executed. There is some solution for the DelegateInvoker that changes code in the generated proxies, which i definately do not want to do!
So here is my question: Is there a simple(!) way of using default Flexbuilder generated proxies with the Mate Invocation tags?
It appears that your request is not that uncommon to Mate. Check out this couple of threads in their forum:
http://mate.asfusion.com/forums/topic.php?id=424
http://mate.asfusion.com/forums/topic.php?id=421
The solution is to modify some bits of the auto-generated code... which in a way ruins the whole point of using code generation.
We have an application that makes heavy use of the RDS.Dataspace.
As in :
set objDS = CreateObject("RDS.DataSpace")
set objJB = objDS.CreateObject("JBdbio.dbio","http://<%=Request.ServerVariables("SERVER_NAME")%>")
To instantiate and then:
NewQry 2,"QryUpdtItem" ' To set the name of the stored procedure
AddParam 255,"ISBN",200,txtISBN.value 'params
AddParam 255,"Titl",200,Title.value
m = objJB.UpdateQry(arrPrm) 'do the call to execute the stored procedure
Some do updates, some selects, etc
With RDS now obsolete for a number of years. How can I keep my asp code and have a Dataspace to attach to my business object (JBDBIO).
Essentially we just pass all of our params and stored procedure to this business object and then just dish up the results.
And if I were to move this to .net - how could I do the same without ajaxing it -- this is all vbscript code that runs, in effect an application within IE
Its time for a complete redesign. VBScript in IE is just not something that you want to be taking forward.
If you still want to use the browser as a means of delivering an inhouse UI then consider ASP.NET-MVC. If you want to attempt to make the UI smooth in the browser then inclusion of AJAX is the direction you need to take.
OTH in your case it may be worth you considering the delivery of the UI in a non-browser medium. For example a Silverlight3 using Ria services may be a way forward, XBAP or Click-once installs may also be an option.
No matter what choice you make its going to be a steep learning curve to move away from ancient RDS/VBScript in the client. You may as well take the opportunity to re-visit the UI behaviour as well.
You said it "flickers" on postbacks in the page your guy had rewritten to ASP.NET, didn't the old version "flicker" on postback (submit)? And wow did the .NET code look like if you have not already found any .NET replacement for the database code?
Or have I not understood right, is the VBScript you are talking about client side VBScript? In that case you can actually use the old client side VBScript in the .NET page as well (just as you can run JavaScript on the client side).
If this does not point in any direction to a sollution, I think you might have to provide some more details with code examples, and what you want to acheive.
I'm building a Web Page that allows the user to pick a color and size. Once they have these selected I need to perform a lookup to see if inventory exists or not and update some UI elements based on this.
I was thinking that putting all the single product data into multidimensional JavaScript array (there is only 10-50 records for any page instance) and writing some client side routines around that, would be the way to go for two reasons. One because it keeps the UI fast and two it minimizes callbacks to the server. What i'm worried about with this solution is code smell.
As an alternative i'm thinking about using a more AJAX purist approach of using HTTP handlers and JSON, or perhaps a hybrid with a bit of both. My question is what are your thoughts as to the best solution to this problem using the ASP.Net 2.0 stack?
[Edit]
I also should mention that this page will be running in a SharePoint environment.
Assuming the data is static, I would vote option #1. Storing and retrieving data elements in a JavaScript array is relatively foolproof and entirely within your control. Calling back to the server introduces a lot of possible failure points. Besides, I think keeping the data in-memory within the page will require less code overall and be more readable to anyone with a more than rudimentary understanding of JavaScript.
i'm against Ajax for such tasks, and vote (and implemented) the first option.
As far as I understand, you won't create Code smells if the JS part is being written by your server-side.
From a user point-of-view, Ajax is an experience-killer for wireless browsing, since any little glitch or mis-service will fail or simply lengthen the interaction by factors of 20(!).
I've implemented even more records than yours in my site, and the users love it. Since some of my users use internet-caffee, or dubious hotel wifi, it wouldn't work otherwise.
Besides, Ajax makes your server-vs-client interaction code much more complex, IMO, which is the trickiest part in web programming.
I would go with your second option by far. As long as the AJAX call isn't performing a long running process for this case, it should be pretty fast.
The application I work on does lots with AJAX and HttpHandler, and our calls execute fast. Just ensure you are minimizing the size of your JSON returned in the response.
Go with your second option. If there are that few items involved, the AJAX call should perform fairly well. You'll keep your code off the client side, hopefully prevent any browser based issues that the client side scripting might have caused, and have a cleaner application.
EDIT
Also consider that client side script can be modified by the user. If there's no other validation occuring to the user's selection, this could allow them to configure a product that is out of stock.