Sharing session between two asp.net apps.

I'm not an expert in enterprise apps, but it seems to me you should redesign
the application before it becomes practically impossible to maintain. Take
Microsoft's web site, for example, probably the most content rich
"application" on the web. It's a real mess, but at least they've broken the
site down into sections from a UI standpoint, and probably from a backend
standpoint as well. When it's broken down like that, you can have entry and
exit points and transfer session information much like you do when crossing
the http / https line in an e-commerce app (going from http to https creates
a new session). You could probably do this in the global.asax.

Also, the more you rely on sessions, the more brittle your app becomes. HTTP
was never meant to be used this way, and relies so much on the client. There
really is a limit to what kinds of apps you would want to make web based,
yet we continue to push the envelope on such a brittle foundation
(HTTP/TCPIP), and let billions of dollars ride of this technology.

Exciting isn't it?!? ;)

-M

"Rajesh.V" <Rajesh_vanchi@dotnet.itags.org.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ezo8vngkDHA.1284@dotnet.itags.org.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> As many of you know this is a legitimate requirement. As once the no of
aspx
> pages pages in a project increase - say to around 200 on dev machine piii
> 500, 256 mb memory. The cpu util stays at 100% for some time and
compilation
> takes a lot of time, not to talk of debugging. Team development is
> impossible without vss and some person spending solely on integrating. So
it
> would be better to split it into sub applicaitons, which will increase the
> reliability. Also multiple teams can work on it.
> Now to this post previously i got various replies.
> 1. From Natty Gur - Use mms(shared memory), which is complicated (at least
> for me :-}. -- Fast but tied up with win32 dll.
> 2. Xiangyang Liu - Use Remoting and use custom db to store the session
> variable and data. -- Slow
> http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/sessiontool.asp
> 3. Use Web service - Too slow
> Now one of my friends picked this one out of msdn
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...Ben-us%3B307467
> This needs some effort during integrating, after the individual Asp.net
apps
> have been tested out. This seems to the solution of the hour and optimum.
> I wonder how many of you Asp.Net developers out there have used this and i
> would like to know whether it works fine.
> Rajesh.VMax, that was quite a viewpoint... I would luv to forward what u have
written to IT managers, who want things done to keep organization and
rollout simpler, and let his successor take care of
maintanance/re-architechuring problems.

"Max" <maximus@.portvista.com> wrote in message
news:zA9jb.53156$Pd.1153477@.twister.tampabay.rr.co m...
> I'm not an expert in enterprise apps, but it seems to me you should
redesign
> the application before it becomes practically impossible to maintain. Take
> Microsoft's web site, for example, probably the most content rich
> "application" on the web. It's a real mess, but at least they've broken
the
> site down into sections from a UI standpoint, and probably from a backend
> standpoint as well. When it's broken down like that, you can have entry
and
> exit points and transfer session information much like you do when
crossing
> the http / https line in an e-commerce app (going from http to https
creates
> a new session). You could probably do this in the global.asax.
> Also, the more you rely on sessions, the more brittle your app becomes.
HTTP
> was never meant to be used this way, and relies so much on the client.
There
> really is a limit to what kinds of apps you would want to make web based,
> yet we continue to push the envelope on such a brittle foundation
> (HTTP/TCPIP), and let billions of dollars ride of this technology.
> Exciting isn't it?!? ;)
> -M
>
> "Rajesh.V" <Rajesh_vanchi@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ezo8vngkDHA.1284@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > As many of you know this is a legitimate requirement. As once the no of
> aspx
> > pages pages in a project increase - say to around 200 on dev machine
piii
> > 500, 256 mb memory. The cpu util stays at 100% for some time and
> compilation
> > takes a lot of time, not to talk of debugging. Team development is
> > impossible without vss and some person spending solely on integrating.
So
> it
> > would be better to split it into sub applicaitons, which will increase t
he
> > reliability. Also multiple teams can work on it.
> > Now to this post previously i got various replies.
> > 1. From Natty Gur - Use mms(shared memory), which is complicated (at
least
> > for me :-}. -- Fast but tied up with win32 dll.
> > 2. Xiangyang Liu - Use Remoting and use custom db to store the session
> > variable and data. -- Slow
> > http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/sessiontool.asp
> > 3. Use Web service - Too slow
> > Now one of my friends picked this one out of msdn
> > http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...Ben-us%3B307467
> > This needs some effort during integrating, after the individual Asp.net
> apps
> > have been tested out. This seems to the solution of the hour and
optimum.
> > I wonder how many of you Asp.Net developers out there have used this and
i
> > would like to know whether it works fine.
> > Rajesh.V
what exactly do you mean by brittle and relying on session?

I am assuming you are framing your argument in the context of asp.net which
behaves entirely different from classic asp where session is concerned.

"Max" <maximus@.portvista.com> wrote in message
news:zA9jb.53156$Pd.1153477@.twister.tampabay.rr.co m...
> I'm not an expert in enterprise apps, but it seems to me you should
redesign
> the application before it becomes practically impossible to maintain. Take
> Microsoft's web site, for example, probably the most content rich
> "application" on the web. It's a real mess, but at least they've broken
the
> site down into sections from a UI standpoint, and probably from a backend
> standpoint as well. When it's broken down like that, you can have entry
and
> exit points and transfer session information much like you do when
crossing
> the http / https line in an e-commerce app (going from http to https
creates
> a new session). You could probably do this in the global.asax.
> Also, the more you rely on sessions, the more brittle your app becomes.
HTTP
> was never meant to be used this way, and relies so much on the client.
There
> really is a limit to what kinds of apps you would want to make web based,
> yet we continue to push the envelope on such a brittle foundation
> (HTTP/TCPIP), and let billions of dollars ride of this technology.
> Exciting isn't it?!? ;)
> -M
>
> "Rajesh.V" <Rajesh_vanchi@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ezo8vngkDHA.1284@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > As many of you know this is a legitimate requirement. As once the no of
> aspx
> > pages pages in a project increase - say to around 200 on dev machine
piii
> > 500, 256 mb memory. The cpu util stays at 100% for some time and
> compilation
> > takes a lot of time, not to talk of debugging. Team development is
> > impossible without vss and some person spending solely on integrating.
So
> it
> > would be better to split it into sub applicaitons, which will increase
the
> > reliability. Also multiple teams can work on it.
> > Now to this post previously i got various replies.
> > 1. From Natty Gur - Use mms(shared memory), which is complicated (at
least
> > for me :-}. -- Fast but tied up with win32 dll.
> > 2. Xiangyang Liu - Use Remoting and use custom db to store the session
> > variable and data. -- Slow
> > http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/sessiontool.asp
> > 3. Use Web service - Too slow
> > Now one of my friends picked this one out of msdn
> > http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...Ben-us%3B307467
> > This needs some effort during integrating, after the individual Asp.net
> apps
> > have been tested out. This seems to the solution of the hour and
optimum.
> > I wonder how many of you Asp.Net developers out there have used this and
i
> > would like to know whether it works fine.
> > Rajesh.V
I went back and thought, what else do u do if you want to persist the id of
the user logged in, and certain details of his like desig, dept... to allow
him to view pages of his access only. And asp.net with session storage in
sql is pretty rugged. I am interested only in intranet, where speed is
upward of 100mbps. Well i am not getting an ans to the question of
hierarchial apps. I might as well try out.

Here is another article and connected discussion

http://www.codeproject.com/useritem...asp#xx627463xx

"Alvin Bruney" <vapordan_spam_me_not@.hotmail_no_spamhotmail.com> wrote in
message news:Ow4vNP4kDHA.3312@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> what exactly do you mean by brittle and relying on session?
> I am assuming you are framing your argument in the context of asp.net
which
> behaves entirely different from classic asp where session is concerned.
> "Max" <maximus@.portvista.com> wrote in message
> news:zA9jb.53156$Pd.1153477@.twister.tampabay.rr.co m...
> > I'm not an expert in enterprise apps, but it seems to me you should
> redesign
> > the application before it becomes practically impossible to maintain.
Take
> > Microsoft's web site, for example, probably the most content rich
> > "application" on the web. It's a real mess, but at least they've broken
> the
> > site down into sections from a UI standpoint, and probably from a
backend
> > standpoint as well. When it's broken down like that, you can have entry
> and
> > exit points and transfer session information much like you do when
> crossing
> > the http / https line in an e-commerce app (going from http to https
> creates
> > a new session). You could probably do this in the global.asax.
> > Also, the more you rely on sessions, the more brittle your app becomes.
> HTTP
> > was never meant to be used this way, and relies so much on the client.
> There
> > really is a limit to what kinds of apps you would want to make web
based,
> > yet we continue to push the envelope on such a brittle foundation
> > (HTTP/TCPIP), and let billions of dollars ride of this technology.
> > Exciting isn't it?!? ;)
> > -M
> > "Rajesh.V" <Rajesh_vanchi@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:ezo8vngkDHA.1284@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > As many of you know this is a legitimate requirement. As once the no
of
> > aspx
> > > pages pages in a project increase - say to around 200 on dev machine
> piii
> > > 500, 256 mb memory. The cpu util stays at 100% for some time and
> > compilation
> > > takes a lot of time, not to talk of debugging. Team development is
> > > impossible without vss and some person spending solely on integrating.
> So
> > it
> > > would be better to split it into sub applicaitons, which will increase
> the
> > > reliability. Also multiple teams can work on it.
> > > > Now to this post previously i got various replies.
> > > > 1. From Natty Gur - Use mms(shared memory), which is complicated (at
> least
> > > for me :-}. -- Fast but tied up with win32 dll.
> > > > 2. Xiangyang Liu - Use Remoting and use custom db to store the session
> > > variable and data. -- Slow
> > > http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/sessiontool.asp
> > > > 3. Use Web service - Too slow
> > > > Now one of my friends picked this one out of msdn
> > > > http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...Ben-us%3B307467
> > > > This needs some effort during integrating, after the individual
Asp.net
> > apps
> > > have been tested out. This seems to the solution of the hour and
> optimum.
> > > I wonder how many of you Asp.Net developers out there have used this
and
> i
> > > would like to know whether it works fine.
> > > > Rajesh.V
> > >
No, just making a general comment about how the reliance in maintaining a
persistent connection over the HTTP protocol, results in a "brittle"
application, because it relies on the client.

So sure, sessions are better in ASP.NET, but it still rides on old HTTP
technology. Cookies, URL, hidden form fields, all rely on the client.

-M

"Alvin Bruney" <vapordan_spam_me_not@.hotmail_no_spamhotmail.com> wrote in
message news:Ow4vNP4kDHA.3312@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> what exactly do you mean by brittle and relying on session?
> I am assuming you are framing your argument in the context of asp.net
which
> behaves entirely different from classic asp where session is concerned.
ok
"Max" <maximus@.portvista.com> wrote in message
news:sPtjb.118641$eS5.43899@.twister.tampabay.rr.co m...
> No, just making a general comment about how the reliance in maintaining a
> persistent connection over the HTTP protocol, results in a "brittle"
> application, because it relies on the client.
> So sure, sessions are better in ASP.NET, but it still rides on old HTTP
> technology. Cookies, URL, hidden form fields, all rely on the client.
> -M
> "Alvin Bruney" <vapordan_spam_me_not@.hotmail_no_spamhotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:Ow4vNP4kDHA.3312@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > what exactly do you mean by brittle and relying on session?
> > I am assuming you are framing your argument in the context of asp.net
> which
> > behaves entirely different from classic asp where session is concerned.