Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > ASP .Net > Performance Question

Reply
Thread Tools

Performance Question

 
 
A. Elamiri
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2004
I am building a portal for a college. I have offices and departments divided
into groups, and within each group there is 3 different levels of Authority:
Director
Director Delegate
Content Creator

Access to certain folder is restricted to certain group, but at the same
time it can restricted by Authority level within that group also.

Which way would be more efficient and would cause the least impact in terms
of performance:
Setting roles in web.confg as <officename>-<authority level>. there are
about 40 different offices and departments, this would mean that in the
worst-case scenario I would have 40 x 3 = 120 Roles defined in the
web.config (I was concerned that it may be too much)

Second option would be to define under each restricted directory in the
AppSettings a MinimumAuthority appSettings key, so I would read that then
concatenate it with the Group name that the user belongs to and check if the
user is in that role. That would mean that in a worst-case scenario I would
only put 40 different group names in there

which way would be more efficient

--
Abdellah Elamiri
..net Developer
Efficacy through simplicity

--
Abdellah Elamiri
..net Developer
Efficacy through simplicity


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Alvin Bruney [MVP]
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2004
In your case, it is not a matter of efficiency because reading the options
incur a disk I/O cost. Rather you should focus on maintainability. The
webconfig file stands out here because it can be edited by most anyone with
notepad experience. In addition, changes to the roles are immediately
applied thru an application restart. Not so with the appsettings.
Appsettings are read on app startup. This is easier for non-technical people
who do not necessarily want to mess with IIS internals to apply settings.

--
Regards,
Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP]
Got tidbits? Get it here...
http://tinyurl.com/27cok
"A. Elamiri" <abdellahDOTelamiriATclintonDOTedutNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>I am building a portal for a college. I have offices and departments
>divided
> into groups, and within each group there is 3 different levels of
> Authority:
> Director
> Director Delegate
> Content Creator
>
> Access to certain folder is restricted to certain group, but at the same
> time it can restricted by Authority level within that group also.
>
> Which way would be more efficient and would cause the least impact in
> terms
> of performance:
> Setting roles in web.confg as <officename>-<authority level>. there are
> about 40 different offices and departments, this would mean that in the
> worst-case scenario I would have 40 x 3 = 120 Roles defined in the
> web.config (I was concerned that it may be too much)
>
> Second option would be to define under each restricted directory in the
> AppSettings a MinimumAuthority appSettings key, so I would read that then
> concatenate it with the Group name that the user belongs to and check if
> the
> user is in that role. That would mean that in a worst-case scenario I
> would
> only put 40 different group names in there
>
> which way would be more efficient
>
> --
> Abdellah Elamiri
> .net Developer
> Efficacy through simplicity
>
> --
> Abdellah Elamiri
> .net Developer
> Efficacy through simplicity
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
A. Elamiri
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2004
Changes are actually done from within the Web Application which edits the
Web.Config file. No one but Administrators have access to that feature.
So it wouldn't matter if I had 120 roles stored in the web.config? I was
thinking that maybe the more the roles the more time it will take for the
Authentication logic to check whether a user belongs to a role which is
authorized

--
Abdellah Elamiri
..net Developer
Efficacy through simplicity
"Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> In your case, it is not a matter of efficiency because reading the options
> incur a disk I/O cost. Rather you should focus on maintainability. The
> webconfig file stands out here because it can be edited by most anyone

with
> notepad experience. In addition, changes to the roles are immediately
> applied thru an application restart. Not so with the appsettings.
> Appsettings are read on app startup. This is easier for non-technical

people
> who do not necessarily want to mess with IIS internals to apply settings.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Alvin Bruney [ASP.NET MVP]
> Got tidbits? Get it here...
> http://tinyurl.com/27cok
> "A. Elamiri" <abdellahDOTelamiriATclintonDOTedutNOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >I am building a portal for a college. I have offices and departments
> >divided
> > into groups, and within each group there is 3 different levels of
> > Authority:
> > Director
> > Director Delegate
> > Content Creator
> >
> > Access to certain folder is restricted to certain group, but at the same
> > time it can restricted by Authority level within that group also.
> >
> > Which way would be more efficient and would cause the least impact in
> > terms
> > of performance:
> > Setting roles in web.confg as <officename>-<authority level>. there are
> > about 40 different offices and departments, this would mean that in the
> > worst-case scenario I would have 40 x 3 = 120 Roles defined in the
> > web.config (I was concerned that it may be too much)
> >
> > Second option would be to define under each restricted directory in the
> > AppSettings a MinimumAuthority appSettings key, so I would read that

then
> > concatenate it with the Group name that the user belongs to and check if
> > the
> > user is in that role. That would mean that in a worst-case scenario I
> > would
> > only put 40 different group names in there
> >
> > which way would be more efficient
> >
> > --
> > Abdellah Elamiri
> > .net Developer
> > Efficacy through simplicity
> >
> > --
> > Abdellah Elamiri
> > .net Developer
> > Efficacy through simplicity
> >
> >

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Performance Tutorials Services - Boosting Performance by DisablingUnnecessary Services on Windows XP Home Edition Software Engineer Javascript 0 06-10-2011 02:18 AM
Newbie Question: python mysqldb performance question cjl Python 3 05-21-2007 02:49 AM
Performance related Question..... Cris Rock ASP .Net 1 02-12-2004 10:47 AM
Web Form Performance Versus Single File Performance jm ASP .Net 1 12-12-2003 11:14 PM
.NET Performance Question, Please Reply Don Beal ASP .Net 13 09-29-2003 03:46 PM



Advertisments