It can be quite a bit since we are doing a lot of data analysis. One
example I have is a method called 200,000 times and without the
proxies it takes 10,000ms to execute. With the proxy wrappers it takes
190,000ms!! Running it through a profiler found the
System.Reflection.MethodBase.Invoke method call is what is killing it.
It seems method invokes are VERY!! expensive. At any rate , im first
trying to figure out how to turn it off totally but going forward I
was looking for alternatives to the castle proxy given that nhibernate
2.0 allows us to substitute our own proxy wrapper so if anyone has
tried alternative wrappers that would be great too.


thanks

scott

On Oct 6, 10:51 am, "Tuna Toksöz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How many times do you need to call those methods?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:47 PM, srf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Im using the  default-lazy=false attribute to totally turn off lazy
> > loading in hopes that no proxy wrapping would happen but Im still
> > getting castle proxy wrappers being generated. Does anyone know if
> > turning off lazy loading will prevent the proxy wrappers from being
> > created? I need to do this because of the big performance problem with
> > the castle proxy wrappers given that it uses
> > System.Reflection.MethodBase.Invoke to redirect the method calls and
> > using this enough times will cause quite a huge performance hit. So Im
> > trying to for the life of me just turn off the wrappers totally and I
> > cant seem to get that to happen so if anyone could shed some light on
> > this for me , that would be great.
>
> > thanks
>
> > scott
>
> --
> Tuna Toksöz
>
> Typos included to enhance the readers attention!
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"nhusers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to