Do you use it? 2

[bigbak]

Does anybody here use Transaction Server, or am I the only sucker.

 

[JakeB]

No, you are not the only sucker out there. Our department has moved our SQL Server app to a three-tiered system. The jury is still out on the "improvement." Although we in the MIS department appreciate the architecture, the application is slower than our previous constant-connection-per-application scheme. Since only a relatively small number users use the application concurrently, I'm not sure the performance penalty is worth it. On the plus side, I found it relatively easy to develop applications with MTS.<br>
<br>
What's your experience?

 

[bigbak]

It's taken me a while to reply, but. We've had good experience with it. Seem to be a bit in limbo if a row is locked on the client, then released and then fire the update business object. Not the quickest thing in the world, but if the package is left running when idle, object creation is fast. Saves us from writing cast iron tight transaction as objects can be created and methods executed in one transaction. The lack of properties for the classes is a pain.

 

[lanstone]

Installing the application seems to be a black art, vbr files, regsvr32, clireg.exe etc. Slight changes in the VB classes seem to cause havoc with reinstallation. do you know of a step by step guide to developing and installing a VB ActiveX dll as an MTS package?

 

[johnk]

Like JakeB, we do not yet use MTS because of the slower performace on our target networds (less than 20 workstations). We dedicate 2 connections to each user at signon.<br>
<br>
However, we intend to use the pooling of middle tier objects as well as pooling connection objects at higher levels of traffic. Microsoft has moved it a big step closer to mainline architecture by incorporating it into COM+ in Win2000.

 

[chiph]

<br>
I just picked up a book from WROX about MTS and VB, and it seems the way to go, from a technology standpoint.<br>
<br>
Like bigbak, I don't know if anyone is shipping a commercial product based on MTS. The configuration seems to be a stumbling block -- can I expect my customer's MIS dept (if they even have one) to know how to create packages and add DLLs to them? I really don't want to hand-hold over *my* toll-free number (I'd rather use theirs &lt;g!&gt for the amount of time required to explain step-by-step what to do.<br>
<br>
Chip H.<br>

 

[pshort]

We've used it in several N-tiered intranet applications and plan to use it even more. So far security context, stateless optimization, and transactions have been the features we've worked with.<br>
<br>
Since IIS uses MTS for web sites anyway (when you configure application settings correctly) I can't see how anyone can afford to not know about MTS if they are using ASP.

 

[spacew]

Yes, we used it for nearly 2 months and the performance is splendid!!!

 

[spacew]

Yes, we used it for nearly 2 months and the performance is splendid!!!

 

[Guest_imported]

We've been using it for the last year and a half. Whilst it's a easy tool to work with, it's taken a long time to find out all it's little problem. Performance is a major problem, but this can be tweaked if you design your applications in a different way. For example, we have found that passing ADORecordsets slow down the entire process, drastically.

Overall it's pretty good, everything is integrated for a the developer. [sig][/sig]

 

[RickThompson]

[TonyBrindle wrote:
... passing ADO Recordset slow the entire process drastically. ]

OK, what do you use as an alternative? I have seen an app where the recordset was converted to an array (2 dimensional), but handling that was VERY difficult and obtuse.

Anything other than that?
============================================ [sig][/sig]

 

[Guest_imported]

As an alternative we pass XML strings. It drastically speeded up our system.

Without any indexes in the SQL database;

Using MTS and Recordsets was around 40 rows/sec
Using MTS and XML was around 700 rows/sec

of note;

NOT Using MTS and just Recordsets was around 1200 rows/sec
NOT Using MTS and just XML was around 1450 rows/sec
[sig][/sig]

 

[TomSark]

Geesh,

Not using any indexes will be awfully slow. This is an unfair comparison. You should at least put appropriate indexes on the tables and then run the numbers again.

You should never 'not' use indexes. Of course it's going to be slow. That's like saying, I only installed 2 of the needed 4 spark plugs on my car. [sig][/sig]

 

[rogerio22]

Hi,

MTS works perfect.
If you are using MS-SQL, better. It makes the development and performance very fast.
But on the other hand, you use Oracle, it will be a little hard, because the integration between MS x Oracle, works fine only with Oracle 8+, in my case I work with version 7.

If you don´t you Oracle 7, my friend, there´s no problem.


Rogerio

(My system is mission critical.)

 

[Guest_imported]

IN response to RickThompson [OK, what do you use as an alternative? I have seen an app where the recordset was converted to an array (2 dimensional), but handling that was VERY difficult and obtuse.] : We passing variant arrays with great success. Are you aware fo the GetRows Method in ADO? Very helpful.

 

[mohmehran]

[TonyBrindle wrote:
... passing ADO Recordset slow the entire process drastically. ]

Just to note: Did you pass it by value? Since passing them by reference will have an overhead of two-way marshaling.

Mohammad Mehran Nikoo
mohmehran@yahoo.com

http://www.intellicomsoft.com

MCP with experience in VB, ASP, XML, SQL, COM