Level Extreme platform
Subscription
Corporate profile
Products & Services
Support
Legal
Français
Using SyncLock
Message
From
24/01/2011 11:50:40
 
 
To
24/01/2011 11:41:59
General information
Forum:
ASP.NET
Category:
Other
Title:
Environment versions
Environment:
VB 9.0
OS:
Windows 7
Network:
Windows 2003 Server
Database:
MS SQL Server
Application:
Web
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
01496120
Message ID:
01497201
Views:
41
>>As I replied to Bonnie, you may want to add an initializer to the dictionary property
>>
>>For a non static property it will initalize when oApp is instantiated
>>
>>for a static property, it will initialize when the static class is first accessed or the static property is first accessed
>>
>>http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms182275(v=VS.100).aspx
>>
>>
>>You don't need any locks then - as I see it
>
>oApp is declared as:
>
>
>        Public Shared oApp As Framework.App = New Framework.App()
>
>
>Are you saying I wouldn't need any lock if I change its declaration? Because, this is when we came to that architecture when we discovered that simultaneous hits from the same worker process where firing at startup, which is always the case if you send a compilation when you have traffic, as the time .NET takes to load the new DLL, this creates a queue, thus several hits waiting to be processed, thus more than one per worker process.
>
>I have something that is working now. I am not sure removing the lock would make it the same.

Let's ask Viv/Bonnie

I think if you add an initializer to the dictionary of Framework.App, or add code to initialize the dictionary in the Framework.App constructor, you do not need a lock

Viv, Bonnie - anyone ?
Gregory
Previous
Next
Reply
Map
View

Click here to load this message in the networking platform