DynamicTypes/OpenAccess/Artifical Types vs. manual table cre

Posted by Community Admin on 04-Aug-2018 10:21

DynamicTypes/OpenAccess/Artifical Types vs. manual table creation/stored procedures

All Replies

Posted by Community Admin on 20-Dec-2010 00:00

I am requiring a number of somewhat complex custom objects/structures/forms and I am debating whether I should make use of the Fluent API and create artificial types with horizontal/vertical database inheritance types, or just manually create the tables with my own stored procedures.  I've read on the Sitefinity forums that there are a number of issues with the DynamicTypes API and so am a little hesistant to attempt to use it.

Also, what would you say are some use cases of not making use of DynamicTypes and doing it all manually?  How robust do you plan the Fluent API to be?

For a more specific question, I will also require the artificial types to be accessible from multiple Sitefinity instances (in terms of viewing and writing).  Will that be possible?

Posted by Community Admin on 27-Dec-2010 00:00

Hello HMcCracken,

At this point we suggest you going with your own tables and procedures. 
The Fluent API will come in hand very soon. The benefits will be that you will do everything from one framework and will not have to maintain custom code or DLLs between upgrades.

The Fluent API must work in all cases, and with different providers. Having that said, you may have different connection strings for the different providers, and this way you can access the different instances you have. It's possible even now, by using the App.Prepare('providername').WorkWith() code. 

Best wishes,
Georgi
the Telerik team
Do you want to have your say when we set our development plans? Do you want to know when a feature you care about is added or when a bug fixed? Explore the Telerik Public Issue Tracking system and vote to affect the priority of the items

This thread is closed