Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 11 days ago.
Improve this question
Program A is good at collecting data while Program B, in another language, is good at creating REST APIs. Is it possible to connect these two with a single database that A and B will read and write to? Performance for database operations is not really an issue in my case.
Sure this is possible. Databases typically can handle multiple connections from different programs/clients. A database does not really care which language the tool that is making the connection is written in.
Short edit:
Also most databases support "transactions". Which are used to cover that different connected clients do not break consistency of your application data while reading and writing in parallel.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to generate a file that contains a stored procedure query and I want to share it, but I need to protect it from reading. This query will be used by another person in his own database and server.
I want to give a SP to another person to use in a different environment but doesn't want them to be able to read the TSQL in the SP.
How can I do that?
You can use the WITH ENCRYPTION clause. However, it is known to be ineffective and easily broken, and there are third party tools available that will let your client break it.
If you want to do it anyway, a tutorial can be found here.
If you use WITH ENCRYPTION along with a thoughtfully constructed EULA, your client should not accidentally see the code, and if he purposefully goes to the trouble to crack your code encryption, you will have civil recourse (i.e. you can sue them).
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Apologies in advance if this is a stupid question. I've more or less just started learning how to use SQL.
I'm making a website, the website stores main accounts, each having many sub-accounts associated with them. Each sub-account has a few thousand records in various tables associated with it.
My question is to do with the conventional usage of databases. Is it better to use a database per main account with everything associated with it stored in the same place, store everything in one database, or an amalgamation of both?
Some insight would be much appreciated.
Will you need to access more than one of these databases at the same time? If so put them all in one. You will not like the amount of effort and cost 'joining' them back together to do a query. On top of that, every database you have needs to be managed, and should you need to transfer data between them that can get painful as well.
Segregating data by database is a last resort.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
So I would like to build a scalable server with Cocoa that can handle a lot of clients.
I guess this won't be possible on a single server as they have a limit on their network connections or would it be possible? I then thought of a database that is shared between multiple processes (on the same, or a different server) in (nearly) realtime, so when a change in process A is made, processes B,C,D sync so all processes have the same data.
Is this the correct way to do it? Could this be made with CoreData or are there better alternatives? I have actually never heard of Cocoa being used in server systems, so is it a bad idea to write a server in it?
Thanks.
my vote for not use CoreData on server side, because sqlite not feet my criteria to server side DB, not sure that is good for concurrency access and multiple connection.
I'd recommend to use one of the many, many (many) ready-to-use services out there that already built a proven infrastructure that works and scales. It's not a trivial task.
FWIW we're using quickblox.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
In my app which is data collection app i need offline support. Let's say when i am gathering user's data there is no connection on device but once the device comes in network the whole data should automatically goes to the server.
How should i implement this kind of functionality.
Thanks,
Your question is pretty vague, but I assume you're wondering HOW to persist data and not how to automatically send it to the server.
If the data is very simple, NSUserDefaults may suffice.
If you need a bit more complicated data structures, you can use archives.
If you need to store complex object graphs you need to use Core Data.
There's a pretty good guide explaining all of these here.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to migrate data from one database to another database in Microsoft SQL Server 2005. I need to verify those rows retrieved before I insert them to the destination database's tables. Which approach is reasonable for this kind of things?
I am trying to use two datasets in my VB.NET program. Is it reasonable? Can you suggest me?
Thanks in advance,
RedsDevils
It depends on how much data you're talking about, but I'd tend to pass on .Net datasets for a migration task, as that means pulling all the data into memory. If you must do this via a .Net client program, at least use a DataReader instead. But what's even better is to keep it all in Sql Server via Sql Server Integration Services.