Jessynoo,
Sorry you were somewhat offended.
The purpose of my post was to encourage an exchange of ideas....based on technical merits.
I will address some of your points...
1. I do think the Dispose method approach is somewhat inefficient.... regardless of whether it first appeared in the Rick Strahl blog. Given a ASP.NET 1.1 architecture I would agree with you...however given the benefits from an ASP.NET 2.0 Health Monitoring architecture....I would have to prefer the Health Monitoring heartbeat web event approach.
2. You are right in that both solutions ping in a similar manner... however the key to each solution is the means in which they are triggered.....Dispose method versus Heartbeat Web Event. I see the Dispose method being somewhat equivalent to being thrown out of an airplane at 10,000 feet and then pulling the rip cord at 1,000 feet. Yes....it works....but would you do it again ?
3. As is pointed out in the Heartbeat Readme file, deriving my MySqlWebEventProvider class from SqlWebEventProvider is simply for demonstration purposes, however in my production environment I prefer this because I log all ASP.NET 2.0 Health Monitoring web events to SQL. I replaced my old proprietary event logging component with ASP.NET 2.0 Health Monitoring. No need to reinvent this wheel. As I point out in the ReadMe, one can just as easily derive from one of the other Health Monitoring web event providers (event log, WMI, SMTP email, custom, etc).
4. Manual configuration ? - Yes.... however the real benefit here is that BOTH DotNetNuke and native non-DNN applications benefit from ASP.NET 2.0 Health Monitoring. DotNetNuke is several years old now.... and in my opinion DNN was primarily useful with an ASP.NET 1.1 architecture. There is a ton of code with a bloated architecture in DotNetNuke. With many of the ASP.NET 2.0 features one does have to carefully examine which feature set is best going forward.
I think that addresses your major points.
I do appreciate your comments.
Philip