I'm trying to get data from api and insert them into a SQL Server .sdf database file, but I'm not sure how to do it especially that I'm using Windows forms on Visual Studio 2010
Can someone help me ?
This is a very broad question, however, at a very high level, you will need to open up a connection to the SQL Server Database and use a data access technology such as ADO.NET or EntityFramework to work with the objects in the database.
See the answer in this thread for an example of working with ADO.NET.
Here's task: We have an sql server database. which is hosted at our server. What we need to do is: we need to create a non-techy-users interface (basically insert/edit forms) and let these non-techy-users to install this database locally, since they are located in the areas without internet connection. Then when they're done using the database we get the data from them and inster it in our database.
The biggest concern is that it is not trivial for non-it people to install sql server. Can you please advise me what solution should I choose? Simple Access should work fine, but i really do not want to mess with it and have data conversion back and forth between engines.
Sync Framework for SQL Server: your application uses a lite weight, embedded SQL Server CE (no installation, just a couple of DLLs deployed along with your app) and the sync framework manages the synchronization with the 'mother ship' SQL Server.
Out of interest, why do they need their own installation? Can't you create a new database on your existing instance?
If you're looking for an easy way to create insert/edit forms on your database, have you considered looking at Microsoft's new LightSwitch product (currently in Beta) or Microsoft's Dynamic Data?
I've written my website using ASP.NET MVC and SQL Server (used a SQL Server instance which ran locally on my machine).
I'm about to upload my site to a hosting provider. However, his DB works under MySQL. I don't care about the data already in the DB itself. It's mostly mock data and a few tables which I don't mind rewriting. But how do I go about the transition from SQL Server to MySQL? How does this influence my queries inside my code? is it the same code syntax? Will I have to recreate the table definitions? In my project I used LINQ to SQL.
Am I forced to look for a host with SQL Server capabilities (i.e. licenses)? (I hope not...)
Thanks!
You may be able to transition smoothly, but I greatly doubt this will be the case.
The differences are many and whether you could depends on what features you used when developing.
If you kept to one of the standards, you may be in luck.
See a comparison sheet on wikipedia.
In regards to the Linq aspect of your question - you should be able to use a Linq provider for MySql instead of MSSql without a problem.
Here is a link to one: http://code2code.net/DB_Linq/
If you do decide to go with the MySql hosting, I suggest you test all aspects of you application to ensure they are working as expected.
LINQ to SQL works with MS SQL Server only...so if you want to keep using it, you need to find a host with a MSSQL database.
I have a tcp\server ( .NET 3.5 ) that notifies connected clients about aah interesting events. These events occur because an aspx website is writing stuff to a database( SQL 2005 )
What would be a good way for this server to monitor the database so to speak
can the db push info to the server in any way?
any suggestions thoughts welcome
thanks
Take a look at SQL Broker Service - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms345108(SQL.90).aspx.
To take this further you can use SqlDependency. There is a nice small article on CodeProject - http://www.codeproject.com/KB/database/chatter.aspx.
There are some caveats using it but many of them are already described on the web. Use the following resources:
http://www.wintellect.com/CS/blogs/jprosise/archive/2005/12/06/sqlcachedependency-hell.aspx
http://davidhayden.com/blog/dave/archive/2006/04/29/2929.aspx
SQL Broker services is quite vast to get in details with, but I hope I gave you good resources to start up with.
I had a similar problem. Needed instant notification of data insertion. I used SQL Broker Service and CLR stored procedure (written in C#). The procedure notify about the inserted data to another application using socket.
You can write similar CLR stored proc or CLR Trigger (Offcource asynchronous when using service broker)
I am currently developing a very simple database that tracks people and the company certifications they hold. This db will need to store letters of certification as PDF files. I was asked to develop this in MS Access, but I think it would be better to build it in SQLServer and use Windows Forms to build the interface. This app will need to be accessible from a public location like a share drive.
My question is, would it be better to do this in SQLServer like I think, or am I full of it and my boss is right on the money? Or are we both wrong?
A good alternative to Access which I use a lot is SQL Server Compact (SqlCe). This is a completely different product than SQL Server Express/Standard/etc. It is an in-process database like Access, it does not run as a separate process or service.
It is free
Full ACID support
Supports multiple connections
Full transactional support
Referential integrity (including cascading updates and deletes)
Locking
T-SQL syntax and SQL Server data types (same API as SQL Server)
Small footprint (~2 MB)
Easy deployment (supports ClickOnce, MSI, XCopy, etc)
Database is contained in a single file you can move around
Supports ADO.NET, LINQ to SQL, LINQ to Entities.
This is an extremely difficult question, without an understanding of the scale of the application. In my opinion, I wouldn't touch Access with a 33.5 ft pole.
Benefits of Access:
No dedicated machine necessary
No problems with portability
Benefits of SQL Server
Better SQL compliance
Better management control
Are you planning to store PDF files in the DB? If so, why?
I choose SQL Server.
An application built on SQL Server will be more robust and support more users than one built on MS Access.
An application built on MS Access can be easier to debug because there is a lack of a server, lack of significant multi-user support, and the entire database sits in a single file on disk that is easily copied around.
Given that, in almost every case, I choose SQL Server over MS Access.
Argh, do the world a favour & use SQL server. Express editions are free, and plenty powerfull enough for your requirements. You can even continue to do the form/report/UI design in Access if you so desire, it can hook up to SQL Server very easily and transparently.
Pros of SQL over access: concurrency, scalablity, reliabiliy, less future developers trying to hunt you down and kill you.
I would almost never use access for a db if I could avoid it, now that SQL Express exists.
If I were you I'd go with what some of the others said and use SQL Express:
http://www.microsoft.com/express/sql/default.aspx
You get all the benefits of a true SQL environment FOR FREE! You can even use the SQL Management Studio as well as leverage Reporting Services (if you download the advanced pack). Download link below:
http://www.microsoft.com/express/sql/download/
Which edition of SQL Server 2008 Express is right for you?
SQL Server 2008 Express is available in the following 3 editions (each is available from the Install Wizard):
SQL Server 2008 Express with Tools
SQL Server database engine - create, store, update and retrieve your data
SQL Server Management Studio Basic - visual database management tool for creating, editing and managing databases
SQL Server 2008 Express with Advanced Services
SQL Server database engine - create, store, update and retrieve your data
SQL Server Management Studio Basic - visual database management tool for creating, editing and managing databases
Full-text Search - powerful, high-speed engine for searching text-intensive data
Reporting Services - integrated report creation and design environment to create reports
SQL Server 2008 Express (Runtime Only)
SQL Server database engine - create, store, update and retrieve your data
SQL Server 2008 Management Studio Express (SSMSE)
Free, easy-to-use graphical management tool for configuring, managing, and administering SQL Server 2008 Express. It can also manage multiple instances of the SQL Server Database Engine created by any edition of SQL Server 2008 including Workgroup, Web, Standard and Enterprise.
Note: This separate download is designed for customers who have previously installed SQL Server 2008 Express (Runtime Only). If you are looking to download SQL Server Express and SSMSE for the first time, please download the SQL Server 2008 Express with Tools from the Install Wizard.
Access, to me, is really a hobbyist tool or for REALLY basic local projects at this point that just hasn't been phased out yet. I'd definitely look to using SQL Express, plus it makes it that much easier to upgrade if you get beyond the 4 GB database barrier in the future.
Go with what you have the best skills in - Access is great for a variety of projects andit can scale really well if you know what you're doing. Conversely, a bad programmer could do an app in Win Forms and SQL Server and produce a badly performing monster.
I personally would go with SQL Express and a Win Forms or ASP.Net front-end as experience shows that these small projects can easily develop over time in to much bigger applications than was originally planned and a well structured database built on SQL Server can scale up more readily to more users if needed.
Hard to say without understand the environment. It could be that all users have Access, but no desktops have .NET Framework (although this would be hard to believe). Maybe all their applications are on Access and that's all the developers and users there know.
Given all that nonsense tho, You ought to use SQL Server Express 2008 and Visual Studio 2008 Express. Hope I don't get you fired. :)
If the application is, as you said, a very simple database, that's what access is precisely for, creating simple databases. You can write both the database and the application forms within the same environment and users won't need to get anything installed.
Be careful though with concurrent access to your application. If you go for the access solution, multiple users won't be able to use the application at the same time. If you want this to happen, you will need the database and the application being apart. This doesn't mean that the DB needs to be SQL server, you can still use Access as your database if you don't require the power of a more complex engine.
EDIT: Just read on a comment that you are planning to have 10 users and less than 1000 records. FORGET about SQL server, you will be wasting your money. No matter if you decide to go for a simple all-access solution or for a distributed web application or desktop app with remote storage, Access is hundreds of times more powerful that what you need. Even for the "toy-ish" engine that access is, you are not using a 1% of it.