Howard Dierking - All Comments

Buy soma online order soma and get cheap soma.

Online pharmacy soma. — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:57:17 GMT

Soma online sales. Buy soma online. Link domain purchase online soma a biz. Soma online soma buy soma online. Soma buy soma cheap soma soma online. Soma online next day.

Buy soma cheap.

Cheap watson soma online. — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 06:43:28 GMT

Cheap soma. Cheap watson soma online.

Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor - Howard Dierking - CodeBetter.Com - Stuff you need to Code Better!

pligg.com — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:35:00 GMT

ALT.NET dotnet .NET C# Agile BizTalk ASP.NET

re: Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor

Ed Blackburn — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:24:37 GMT

If you're evaluating options, take a look at http://openrasta.com

re: Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor

Colin Jack — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:57:47 GMT

@Dean

Yeah WCF can be a real pain, the WCF Facility is great but there's still a lot of friction and I'm not really sure how useful 90%+ of the WCF "features" are for this sort of service.

Just on running on a transport protocol other than TCP/IP, remember HTTP and TCP/IP are not the same thing, but yeah I agree with your point. It is unlikely you'll have to move from HTTP, in addition if you do its likely to be an architectural change such as embracing EDA, and even if that isn't the case the WCF approach isn't isolating you effectively. The key thing is to ensure key business logic/workflow is kept outside the layer that is coupled to HTTP, but I think thats good design anyway.

re: Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor

Dean Thrasher — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:44:52 GMT

I haven't begun working with WCF 4, but I've found MVC to be many times more productive an environment than WCF.

Besides, what are the chances that someone will ask you to make your service layer run on something _other_ than TCP/IP in the next five years?

re: Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor

Colin Jack — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 11:40:03 GMT

On our project we are using WCF for a RESTful Web Services layer and MVC for our Web apps. We needed that architecture and tech choices were made early on, but my point is I've done a good bit of work with them both.

So on to your discussion advantages of WCF, first is protocol independence. The question is whether its useful, www.markbaker.ca/.../protocol-independence.

Some questions I'd have on it are:

* Is your IPersonService really independent of URIs and HTTP? If you did decide to move from HTTP/URI would that interface stay or would you need to rethink?

* How about the implementation, the code inside the PersonService? To keep it independent of the application protocol we'd need to consider abstracting the request/response headers, the HTTP status codes, all the caching functionality. Is that sensible?

* How about linking (and HATEOAS), which involves URIs, do we skip that?

* And then there's the fact that if we want to take advantage of features of HTTP, such as its great caching support, then we have to be prepared to have it influence our resource/service design directly. Do we skip that because we might want to expose this service in a different way in the future?

Personally I don't want to skip key features of REST/HTTP, they are too useful. Same goes for messaging/EDA, when using them I think you are better using something like NServiceBus which embraces that style.

The question then becomes is building RESTful services on top of WCF a joy, the answer is no. You end up putting in ridiculous amounts of work (colinjack.blogspot.com/.../wcf-and-rest.html) just to get simple things working. I'm slightly hopeful about WCF4 though, fingers crossed they've made the right choices this time.

On the extensibility story, other frameworks do seem to be setting out for a good extensibility story these days and anyway we've found the WCF extensibility approach a bit clunky and inappropriate in some cases.

re: Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor

Krzysztof Kozmic — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 11:19:09 GMT

I just clicked to mention WCF Facility, but I guess there's no need at this point.

It has poor documentation, I admit, but in the following days I set of to improve it so keep looking here: using.castleproject.org/.../Windsor+WCF+integration+facility

There will hopefully be a lot of useful content here quite soon.

re: Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor

Ken Egozi — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:36:07 GMT

ha ha ha

I was just about to link to Mike Hadlow's post series on the WCF Facility :)

re: Vanilla Yet Composable HTTP Services With WCF 4 and Windsor

Mike Hadlow — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:59:15 GMT

You might want to check out the Windsor WCF Facility. It integrates WCF with Windsor and provides an elegant fluent API for WCF configuration. The documentation is limited, but it's a really nice piece of work.

I've written a series of posts about it:

mikehadlow.blogspot.com/.../multi-tenanted-services-with-windsor.html

re: New Machine Parts List

Bahadir CAmbel — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:37:24 GMT

I think , this should be your main HDD as well ,

its a 40gb SSD

www.newegg.com/.../Product.aspx

re: New Machine Parts List

Michael J. Ryan — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:05:53 GMT

I would first suggest a better power supply, especially depending on your video card and the number of HDDs you plan on running. you might want to consider a core i5, you'll save about $250-300 with maybe a 15-20% cpu perf hit (1/2 the cost for 85% of the speed. With that do a decent 64-80GB SSD for booting/os and a decent 7200 rpm HDD for mass storage, which will more than make up the difference in CPU performance for your usage. A Phenom2 265 may be worth considering as well, unless you plan on dropping another $500+ for a faster CPU in the next 2 years, the 1366 boards imho arent really worth it.

re: New Machine Parts List

Randall Sutton — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:05:40 GMT

Might want to check out some testing I did with various configurations before purchasing your own.

http://rsurl.net/blog14

re: New Machine Parts List

Tom — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:00:43 GMT

Sounds like a nice machine - I would also recommend upgrading to 1 or 2 WD Velociraptors as that's the main bottle neck.

It might also be worth getting 4 gigs of RAM instead of 2 as that seams pretty standard these days.

re: New Machine Parts List

alwin — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:18:03 GMT

I would try to look for a cheaper processor and motherboard, and then put in an SSD :)

Good luck with the build!