Contemporary applications are being based on three popular architectural approaches. They are
There exists certain degree of confusion between all the three approaches. Mostly the first two are often referred as if they were the same one (see at Wikipedia). This can happen, possibly, because the three approaches aren't antagonistic. Actually, is pretty possible to find applications where the three are present. So let's dedicate some words to each of them
3-Layered Architecture
This approach implies a division of responsibilities in logical components. They are:
Although a physical distribution of these or other application components can arise, this is not mandatory. Actually the benefits this architecture style brings are maintenance and reusability
Maintenance, because every layer comprises a set of few, cohesive APIs (the Presentation layer, APIs like WinForms, or ASP.NET, maybe Atlas; the Data Access layer, possibly ADO.NET, System.Xml; the Business layer probably can be almost agnostic of platform APIs, except the basic ones like Collections, etc)
Reusability is possible as we can add a new presentation layer for mobile devices, change the persistence mechanism by another database, possibly some static data in XML; but changes in one layer shouldn't impact on the others
For a deeper discussion on 3-Layered Architecture, I suggest the chapter ad hoc at the book Enterprise Solution Patterns (MS Patterns and Practices): http://msdn.microsoft.com/architecture/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnpatterns/html/ArcThreeLayeredSvcsApp.asp
3-Tier Architecture
In this approach, we privilege a physical division of activities. Let's see:
The application server here plays a key role as a concentrator of low-level services (communication, security, etc), thus joining different channels in their access to enterprise back-ends
This approach brings Scalability, Centralized Security and Fault Tolerance. A better explanation of this approach is available in the same book, at http://msdn.microsoft.com/architecture/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnpatterns/html/ArcThreeTieredDistribution.asp
Model-View-Controller
We have already reviewed this behavioral architecture pattern at Starting with Model/View/Controller (MVC) Architecture Pattern (http://www.skyscrapr.net/blogs/solution/archive/2006/08/07/262.aspx). In brief words, this time the three components are
This pattern is very useful to comprehend and implement behavioral aspects of the user interface, and its relationship with the rest of the system. It permits keep low the coupling between UI technologies and business logic together with persistence mechanisms. A deeper discussion is available at http://msdn.microsoft.com/architecture/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnpatterns/html/ArcThreeTieredDistribution.asp
Conclusion
As said above, these three approaches allow us a better understanding and organization of components. Both logical and physically speaking. Although they help us gain different features like Reusability or Scalability, they can perfectly be present in a same implementation
Most of the people think that 3 Tier architecture, three- Layer architecture and MVC . all are same....
i want 2 clear define with 3-tier,3-layer and MVC
bout the 3-tier architecture layers. . need examples. . . need help
You can see a N-tier architecture example with downloadable source code at http://www.dotnetfunda.com/articles/article18.aspx
can you please check links given here , it is not working ... It will be great if this is been make working other wise this topic will useless as detail given here is not enough for understanding.
really a goof Article. it nicely describe the difference amongst the three well known terms.keep it up!!!
Can any clear my Confusion ????
"Is it necessary to separate class in Business layer & data access layer respectively for each class in Presentation layer ? If YES then why ?"