In my application I use multi tenant design in my SQL Server database.
My question is: what if one of my customer comes and say, I want my own data as a backup file, how can I create backup file for just that tenant?
Is there is any way to do that?
Do I need any 3rd party tool? Can I do this in a .NET console application?
how can I create backup file for just that tenant?
There is no way to do this without running an ETL job either to extract the tenant's data, or to remove the other tenants' data from a restored copy of the database.
This is one of the (many) reasons why you should favor using a database-per-tenant architecture.
Related
I need to create a database solely for analytical purposes. The idea here is for it to start off as a 1:1 replica of a current SQL Server database but we will then add in additional tables. The idea here is to be able to have read-write access to a db without dropping anything in production inadvertently.
We would ideally like to set a daily refresh schedule to update all tables in the new tb to match the tables in the live environment.
In terms of the DBMS for the new database, I am very easy - MySQL, SQL Server, PostgreSQL would be great -- I am not hugely familiar with the Google Storage/BigQuery stack but if this is an easy option, I'm open to it.
You could use a standard HA/DR solution with a readable secondary (Availability Groups/mirroring /log shipping).
then have a second database on the new server for your additional tables.
Cloud Storage and BigQuery are not RDBMS services themselves, but could be used in this case to store the backups/exports/dumps from the replica, and then have the analytical work performed on those backups.
Here is an example workflow:
Perform a backup and restore in a different database
Add the new tables in the new database
Export the database as a CSV file on your local machine
Here you could either directly load the CSV file in BigQuery, or upload that file in a Cloud Storage bucket previously created
Query the data
I suggest to take a look at the multiple methods for loading data in BigQuery, as well as the methods for querying against external data sources which may help to determine which database replication/export method might be best for your use case.
Today I maintain project that has really messy DB that need a lot of refactor and publish on clients machines.
I know that I could add a SQL Server Database project that contains just scripts of the database and creates a .dacpac file that allows me to change clients databases automatically.
Also I know that I could just add an .mdf file to the App_Data or even to Solution_Data folder and have my database there. I suppose that localDb that already exists allows me to startup my solution without SQL Server
And atlast i know that Entity Framework exist with it's own migrations. But i don't want to use it, besouse i can't add and change indexes with it's migrations and i don't have anought flexibility when i need to describe difficult migrations scenarios.
My goals:
Generate migration scripts to clients DB's automaticaly.
Make my solution self-contained, that any new Programmer that came to project don't even need to install SQL Server on his machine.
Be able to update local (development) base in 1-2 clicks.
Be able to move back in history of db changes (I have TFS server)
Be able to have clean (only with dictionaries or lookup tables) db in solution with up to date DB scheme.
Additionally i want to be able to update my DB model (EF or .dbml) automatically or very easy way.
So what I what to ask:
What's a strengths and weaknesses of using this 2 approaches if I want to achive my goals?
Can be that I should use sort of combination of this tools?
Or don't I know about other existing tool from MS?
Is there a way to update my DAL model from this DB?
What's a strengths and weaknesses of using this 2 approaches if I want to achive my goals?
Using a database project allows you to version control all of the database objects. You can publish to various database instances and roll out changes incrementally, rather than having to drop and recreate the database, thus preserving data. These changes can be in the form of a dacpac, a SQL script, or done right through the VS interface. You gain a lot of control over deployments using pre- and post-deployment scripts and publishing profiles. Developers will be required to install SQL Server (the developer/express edition is usually good enough).
LocalDB is a little easier to work with -- you can make your changes directly in the database without having to publish. LocalDB doesn't have a built-in publish process for pushing changes to other instances. No SQL Server installation required.
Use a database project if you need version control for your database objects, if you have multiple users concurrently making changes, or if you have multiple applications that use the same database. Use LocalDB if none of those conditions apply or for small apps that require their own standalone database.
Can be that I should use sort of combination of this tools?
Yes. According to Kevin's comment below, "If the Database Project is set as your startup project, hitting F5 will automatically deploy it to LocalDB. You don't even need a publish profile in this case."
Or don't I know about other existing tool from MS?
Entity Framework's Code First approach comes close.
Is there a way to update my DAL model from this DB?
Entity Framework's POCO generator works well unless you make changes to your DAL classes, then those changes get lost the next time you run the generator.
There is a new tool called SqlSharpener which can generate classes from the SQL files in a database project. I have not used it so I cannot vouch for it but it looks promising.
One way for generating client script for DB changes is to use database modeling tool like ERWin Which have a free community edition. The best way to meet your database version control requirement and easy script generation is Redgate SQL Source Control. Using Redgate tool you will meet the first five goals mentioned. Moreover, you can now update EF Model by single click after changing DB schema (i.e. Database first approach) as required in goal 6.
I do not recommend using LocalDB at all. It always make issues with source control like "DB File is in use and can't commit...” In addition, the developer in the project will not have common set of updated data to work on unless a developer add test data to the database and ask others to get latest version and overwrite their own database Or generate update script by the previous mentioned tool and ask every developer to run it on his localDB.
The best way in your situation is to use SQL Server on network. A master version that all the developers use. Since you have version control on the database using previously mentioned tool, you can rollback any buggy change in the database server.
If you think that RedGate tool is expensive for the budget of your project. A second approach is to generate single SQL file from your database that has all database object and the other developers update the SQL file in source control per their changes. This can be done easily by using schema compare tool in visual studio and appending the generated script to SQL file in the source control. With EF DB First approach, you will not have to add many migration classes as in EF Code first.
A project I am working on is storing each database object (tables, store procedures, etc) in its own file in source control, TFS. I am thinking about implementing a workflow that will build the database in a Windows Azure SQL Server VM instance tied to TFS commits that will run tests for continuous integration.
How does one reconstruct the database from these individual files? Since there are dependencies to consider among other things, is there a standard practice on how to construct a database with needed structure when the objects are stored in individual files?
I am thinking that file by file might not actually be a realistic way to do this? If this is the case, do some companies keep an empty database in the testing domain to be filled with data for CI purposes and not drop the database during test tear down?
Sounds like your team had a SQL Server Database Project at some point. If it's not there, you can create one, and include the individual script files in the appropriate folder in the SQL Server Database Project.
Then all you have to do is right click and deploy to whichever environment you want to deploy the database to.
Here's more: CREATING A SQL SERVER DATABASE PROJECT IN VISUAL STUDIO 2012.
We are not hosting our databases. Right now, One person is manually creating a .bak file from the production server. The .bak then copied to each developer's pc. Is there a better apporach that would make this process easier? I am working on build project right now for our team, I am thinking about adding the .bak file into SVN so each person has the correct local version? I had tried to generate a sql script but, it has no data just the schema?
Developers can't share a single dev database?
Adding the .bak file to SVN sounds bad. That's going to keep every version of it forever - you'd be better off (in most cases) leaving it on a network share visible by all developers and letting them copy it down.
You might want to use SSIS packages to let developers make ad hoc copies of production.
You might also be interested in the Data Publishing Wizard, an open source project that lets you script databases with their data. But I'd lean towards SSIS if developers need their own copy of the database.
If the production server has online connectivity to your site you can try the method called "log shipping".
This entails creating a baseline copy of your production database, then taking chunks of the transaction log written on the production server and applying the (actions contained in) the log chunks to your copy. This ensures that after a certain delay your backup database will be in the same state as the production database.
Detailed information can be found here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187103.aspx
As you mentioned SQL 2008 among the tags: as far as I remember SQL2008 has some kind of automatism to set this up.
You can create a schedule back up and restore
You don't have to developer PC for backup, coz. SQL server has it's own back up folder you can use it.
Also you can have restore script generated for each PC from one location, if the developer want to hold the database in their local system.
RESTORE DATABASE [xxxdb] FROM
DISK = N'\xxxx\xxx\xxx\xxxx.bak'
WITH FILE = 1, NOUNLOAD, REPLACE, STATS = 10
GO
Check out SQL Source Control from RedGate, it can be used to keep schema and data in sync with a source control repository (docs say supports SVN). It supports the datbase on a centrally deployed server, or many developer machines as well.
Scripting out the data probably won't be a fun time for everyone depending on how much data there is, but you can also select which tables you're going to do (like lookups) and populate any larger business entity tables using SSIS (or data generator for testing).
We have a common problem of moving our development SQL 2005 database onto shared web servers at website hosting companies.
Ideally we would like a system that transfers the database structure and data as an exact replica.
This would be commonly achieved by restoring a backup. But because they are shared SQL servers, we cannot restore backups – we are not given access to the actual machine.
We could generate a script to create the database structure, but then we could not do a data transfer through the menu item Tasks/Import Data because we might violate foreign key constraints as tables are imported in an order the conflicts with the database schema. Also, indexes might not be replicated if they are set to auto generate.
Thus we are left with a messy operation:
Create a script in SQL 2005 that generates the database in SQL 2000 format.
Run the script to create a SQL 2000 database in SQL 2000.
Create a script in SQL 2000 that generates the database structure WITHOUT indexes and foreign keys.
Run this script on the production server. You now have a database structure to upload data to.
Use SQL 2005 to transfer the data to the production server with Tasks/Import data.
Use SQL 2000 to generate a script that creates the database with indexes and keys.
Copy the commands that generate the indexes and foreign keys only. These are located after the table creation commands. Note: In SQL 2005, the indexes and foreign keys are generated as one and cannot be easily separated.
Run this script on the production database.
Voila! The database is uploaded with all data and keys/constraints in place. What a messy and error prone system.
Is there something better?
Scott Gu had written few posts on this topic :
SQL Server Database Publishing Toolkit for Web Hosting
Generation scripts are fine for creating the database objects, but not for transporting database information. For example, client-specific databases where the developer is required to pre-populate some data.
One of the issues I've run into with this is the new MAX types in SQL Server 2005+. (nvarchar(max), varchar(max), etc.) Of course, this is worse when you are actually using Sql Server Express, which doesn't allow for exporting other than creating your own scripts to create the data.
I would recommend switching to a hosting company that allows you to have the ability to FTP backup files and does NOT require you to use your own scripts. That's the whole point of SQL Server, right? To provide more tools that are friendlier to use. If the hosting company takes that away, you may as well move to MySql for its ease in dumping information.
WebHost4Life is a life saver in this category. They offer FTP to the database server to upload your backup file or MDF and LDF files for attachment! I was so upset when I saw GoDaddy had the similar restriction you mentioned. Their tool didn't tell me it was a bad import, and I couldn't figure out why my site was coming back with 500 errors.
One other note: I'm not sure which is considered more secure. I enabled external connections in GoDaddy and connected with Management Studio, and I was able to see every database on that server! I couldn't access them, but I now have that info. A double whammy is that GoDaddy requires that the user name for the DB be the same as the DB! now all you need to do is spam passwords against those hundreds of DBs!
Webhost4life, on the other hand, has only your specific database shown in Management Studio. And they let you pick your own DB name and user name, independent of each other. They only append the same unique id on the end of the user & db names in order to keep them from conflicting with others.
You should not rely on restoring backups for copying / transferring databases. You need to use scripts - trust me you will get better at it.
I have used the RedGate Compare tools with shared hosting and it works well.
Database-generation scripts are messy, but they also have several advantages that ... well, make the pain more tolerable.
First, if you treat the DB scripts as real programming tasks in and of themselves, you can encapsulate the messiness. If you generate a script once (using a database tool), you can split the table structure aspects from the constraint aspects (keys, indices, etc.). Similarly, you can export the data once, but split it it into "system" data that's not frequently changed but is necessary for correct operation (stuff like tax or shipping rates, etc.), 'test' data that's easily identifiable, and 'operational' data that needs to be moved from DB version Old to DB version New (last week's Orders).
The first 3 minutes after you've accomplished that, things are wonderful: you can regenerate a new database with or without test data in a few minutes. Unfortunately, after 3 minutes, the databases are out of synch, at least in terms of data, if not quite as frequently in terms of structure.
I personally like to have each table's structure as a separate SQL file (and it's constraints as a separate file in a separate directory, and it's test data in one file, it's system data in another, etc.). On the one hand, this means that several different files have to be touched when making a change, but on the other hand, it makes it much easier to see the granularity of what's been changed: it's all right there in the version control logs. (I could probably be convinced that many-files is a mistaken strategy...)
All of this is predicated on the assumption that you have some facility for actually running a complex script involving many files and are not just constrained to some Web-based control panel, which may be what you're describing when you say "we are not given access to the actual machine." I feel that you can't do custom software development and not have some kind of shell access on the server; the hosting business is competitive enough that you can certainly find a script-friendly host easily enough.
Check whether the webhsoting company provides myLittleBackup
This is definitively the easiest solution to "install" a db from the development server to the shared sql server
Answer for SQL Server 2008 users.
I had the same exact issue as OP but I was using SQL Server 2008 and my shared hosting company is GoDaddy. Here's the solution to copy DB + the data to GoDaddy database...
In Visual Studio 2010, go to Server Explorer (in VS Express, I think it's called database explorer). Right click on database and select Publish to Provider ... this opens the Database Publishing Wizard ... go thru the wizard and it'll create a xxx.sql file on your local computer ...
Open SQL Server Management Studio and connect to the GoDaddy database (you should have already created this via the GoDaddy control panel within their website) ...
Open windows explorer and find the xxx.sql file and double click it. The script should open up in SSMS. Execute the script "within the proper database" ... voila, done.