jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Thu Nov 5 11:32:51 CST 2009
Shamil, Listen to this... > Before you get comfortable with WF you can code you ProcessX, ProcessY, ... steps as "meta-process" text or xml files keeping fully qualified class names for your dedicated classes. And your "generic execution engine" will be just a simple code reading "meta-process" description, instantiating custom classes using .NET Reflection, calling their generic context/initialization methods, running SP by calling generic Run() method (parameters setting is inside your custom classes), then calling generic termination methods and iterating to the next step/finishing when "meta-process" file description ends. Now read this. Open form Select stored procedure, select parameter, select parameter. click save. Select stored procedure, select parameter, select parameter. click save. Continue till done. ;) Do you remember reading my statement about "learning the minimum required to do the task at hand, right now"? Read your solution again. John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com Shamil Salakhetdinov wrote: > Hi John, > > If your "Process X", "Process Y",... calls to stored procedures do have > constant parameters' values then I do not see (I can be missing them) clear > reasons to use table-driven approach - I'd just have hardcoded ProcessX, > ProcessY, ... calling C# wrapper classes' methods to execute SPs. And the > latter wrapper classes can inherit from some generic base class(es) to keep > executing context, collect statistics etc... > > As I noted previously WF (Windows Workflow Foundation) could be a good > candidate for your subject area but WF has a steep learning curve so you > will not be able to effectively apply it right now but with small dedicated > classes, which you're writing right now (and delivering your custom > solutions right now) you'll be able to relatively easy migrate to WF based > solutions in the future. And if you will spend time working on generic > custom table-driven solution you'll probably have to throw it away later > when migrating to WF... > > Before you get comfortable with WF you can code you ProcessX, ProcessY, ... > steps as "meta-process" text or xml files keeping fully qualified class > names for your dedicated classes. And your "generic execution engine" will > be just a simple code reading "meta-process" description, instantiating > custom classes using .NET Reflection, calling their generic > context/initialization methods, running SP by calling generic Run() method > (parameters setting is inside your custom classes), then calling generic > termination methods and iterating to the next step/finishing when > "meta-process" file description ends. That could be it. > > Thank you. > > --Shamil > > -----Original Message----- > From: dba-vb-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:dba-vb-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby > Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 7:34 PM > To: Discussion concerning Visual Basic and related programming issues. > Subject: Re: [dba-VB] How do you run SQL Server processes > > Shamil,