Encapsulate a database connection in business objects or not?

Question

I usually like to create a database connection myself and manually control its lifetime using `using {} '. For example:

SqlConnection sqlConnection = new SqlConnection( connectionString );
using( sqlConnection ) {
    BusinessObject myBusinessObject = new BusinessObject( sqlConnection );
    // do stuff with the business object
    ...
}

Thus, it is visible and obvious that I am using a resource that needs to be cleaned accordingly. However, this leads to many repetitive efforts. I am tempted to create an Sql connection inside a business object and implement IDisposable on it. I would close the connection in the Dispose () method.

using( BusinessObject myBusinessObject = new BusinessObject() ) {
    // do stuff with myBusinessObject
    ...
}

The problem I am facing is that it may not be so obvious that the business object should be deleted if you do not see it in use.

How do you guys do this?

Answer 1

- ( ) . - ( ), , - , -. , . @Marc , Unit of Work, .

, LINQtoSQL, nHibernate, Subsonic .., , , , , . , , .

Answer 2

, .

-, , - (.. ). , (- ) . , .

- , TransactionScope , db.

Answer 3

I do not think that a business object should know or care about whether it is permanent. An individual, permanent business entity cannot know when it is part of a larger unit of work; that the responsibility for the service level. Leave the connection to business objects. The service level is the right place to receive connections, usually from a connection pool, set transaction boundaries, commit or rollback, and clean up.