I am starting an application (c#, .net) that will interact with a Microsoft SQL database. I need the ability for multiple clients to access the data concurrently so I an going to use a service based database (.mdf). Is it possible to develop the application using a local database (.sdf) and then easily switch it over to a service based database when it comes time for deployment? Is that how this type of development it typically done?
You can control the data source by providing connection string to your database in .config file.
You can even create Debug and Release versions of your .config file with different connection strings. Debug can point to your local machine and Release to production.
Development shops vary, but it is pretty common to develop apps using SQL Express locally and then use a full installation of SQL Server for the production environment.
The only thing I would advise is make sure that the DB you chose for your dev environment supports the same features as what you expect in production. For example don't use SQL Express on your dev box when you expect to use Oracle in production.
If the database schema in both backends is exactly the same than the only thing you will need to do is change the connection string when you are ready to move to the service based database.
Be aware that the slightest change in the schema can (and probably will) cause problems.
You want to use SQL Compact Edition (as you said database file extension is .sdf), right? You can use MSSQL Express Edition instead, as it acts more like full MSSQL Server, and is still free and not so hard to install on developer's machine (I personally prefer this option). There are differences between the two (as explained here: http://blog.sqlauthority.com/2009/04/22/sql-server-difference-between-sql-server-compact-edition-ce-and-sql-server-express-edition/). If you don't want features like triggers/procedures/views in your database, you can still use CE, though.
If you have multiple clients then you should use SQL Server Express (.mdf file) - SQL Server Compact (.sdf file) is useful when you are building an application that is going to be deployed on client machines and will run standalone, e.g. windows forms application with a local database. SQL Server Compact is just an alternative for MS Access .mdb files or SQLite, the so called "embedded databases", while SQL Server Express is a real database server (albeit with some limitations to render it unsuitable for large commercial applications) and should be used in the cases where multiple clients use central database, e.g. web applications and smart client apps (the latter could also make use of a local embedded database though).
Related
How can I ran x86 .net 3.5 Windows Forms app with .mdf database on the computer without SQL Server (for example, XP of common user).
I have found few samples of connection strings, but all of them are contains something like Data Source=.\SQLEXPRESS
Doubt, that user will be having SQLEXPRESS on his computer. I want something like work with Access db - so user could work without even knowing, what's server, only with local file
MSSQL I have chosen instead of Access, because in the future I can add publish DB on server, but not now.
Maybe, I should use SQLLite, but how in that case?
Thanks.
How can I ran x86 .net 3.5 Windows Forms app with .mdf database on the computer without SQL Server?
This question has very simple answer - you can't!
You must distribute and install some version/edition of SQL Server with your application, otherwise the .mdf file will be nothing more than waste of disk space. You can install SQL Server along with your app. For more information you can see Install SQL Server from the Command Prompt and Install SQL Server using a configuration file. If this is a simple app working locally on a single workstation, you may want to consider using SQL Server Express LocalDB.
Another option is to use different database engine, which has easier deployment and embedding - SQLite, Firebird Embedded, etc. Pick one that you like. Most of these solutions require only to distribute one DLL/assembly with your application. You will not get the full power of SQL Server, but for most apps, it isn't needed anyway.
I am creating a c# application which requires to use a database and i am also planning to create an installer for my application. I just want to ask which database would be best to use in my application and how do i install it on a user machine while installing my application through installer file.
I have thought of using MYSQL database but for that u need to have MYSQL installed.
Update
i want each user to have there own instance of database when they install the application
You do not have to ship a full database server with your application; only the redistributable runtime which your application would use to connect to the actual database server remotely. In the case of MySQL, you only need the assemblies.
Applications I wrote relied heavily on SQL Server. In order to simplify evaluations and the initial deployment, the installer would install SQL Server Express (installed as an application specific instance). This is an approach I'd recommend if your application is intended to a centralised database.
What is key to understand, especially with commercial application, is that the database engine you install may have to co-exist with existing versions of the respective database engine. That is why application specific instances was created for SQL Server Express.
The alternatives, which are embedded, are:
SQLite.net
SQL Server Compact Edition. The deployment process is well defined.
VistaDB
Embedded databases have some challenges when deployed as part of a server application. For many years, Microsoft refused to allow SQL Server Compact Edition to be used for ASP.NET applications. If the database is per user, per device, an embedded database may be perfect.
Also be aware that MySQL has license restrictions when shipped as part of commercial software (aka you're acting as an OEM, ISV or VAR).
Have a look at SQL Server Express Edition.
It's just a file which you can copy and a class library which allows to access it. And after you finished your installation you can just delete the files (or to keep them if you need them to uninstall the product).
may be u are a fresh.
MYSQL is ok ,but u are creating a C# application,i strongly advise you use mssql
because C# has a close relationship with mssql,develop more convenient.
My advice would be using SQL Azure.
But only if:
You don't need much storage (<1GB).
You don't save sensitive Data there.
Your users have an internet connection.
It's a cloud based Sql Server Database. And the Conneciton is very simple, basically you connect like to any other Database via the Connection String.
www.windowsazure.com
I might be completely off on this, but is there a way to have a database project point to a remote server? My reason for asking is that we have a shared DEV Database for development use, and it seems like overkill for each developer to have a local instance of SQL Server as well. Is there a connection string that I can set or modify to point the remote server, or is the only way you can have a database project is to have a local instance on your machine. Please let me know if what I am asking does not make sense.
Thanks!
SQL Server Data Tools (which is what you're using for your database project) can work in two ways:
Connected Database mode.
Project oriented, offline database mode.
If you look at those articles. you will see that for development purposes, in both cases a localdb instance is needed. The local server is a limited SQL Server Express installation, which comes by default with Data Tools. So all you need to do is install Data Tools. If you already did, then you have localdb support.
More on this from MSDN:
Microsoft SQL Server 2012 provides a local on-demand server instance,
called SQL Server Express Local Database Runtime, which is activated
when you debug a SQL Server Database project. This local server
instance can be used as a sandbox for building, testing and debugging
your project. It is independent of any of your installed SQL Server
instances, and is not accessible outside SQL Server Data Tools (SSDT).
The workflow, for a central development database, would be:
Create the database project and distribute it to each developer.
Developers work "offline" and add/remove objects from the database.
Before submitting the changes to source control, each developer also syncs the local database changes with the central development database.
The rest of the team gets the changes from source control, so no manual sync needed. Only a new localdb publish would be required.
Of course, there are many other things to consider: local data (see here about replicating data to the real database), and some features not supported by localdb (like full text search).
I've tried this flow and works really well if you learn to control it. You always get a consistent central development database, without intermediary and unstable modifications.
You can change the "Debug" properties to point to a different server than the (localdb) instance. Most times you won't do this unless you're using some features that aren't supported in the (localdb). That would let you push the changes to your central server on each debug build. However, this could have a lot of unintended consequences if you're just playing around. The better option would be to leave the (localdb) debug instance alone and set up Publish Profiles for a real "Local" SQL Server install and for your shared Dev server. That way you can do all of your dev work offline and only push changes to the shared dev server when you're ready to do so.
I have a series of blog articles on SSDT at my blog that may be helpful: http://schottsql.blogspot.com. I'd also recommend looking at Jamie Thomson's blog at http://sqlblog.com - he has a lot of tips on DB and SQL Projects that could be helpful.
I've started work on a project that requires an SQL Server Database. I will be building a front end application in c# .Net 3.5, that will use LINQ to SQL.
I need to host the database on a network share so that a group of users can all gain access to the database, mainly for read only.
I know that SQL Server Compact is designed to run on the local machine and my company is not willing to front the costs of a full blooded SQL Server.
Is there a way of achieving what I need to do via SQL Server Express?
If so, which are the best guides on how to set this up?
Thanks
If you go with the (free) SQL Server express, it will do what you need - but you don't access it thru a network shared drive - the server would be located by an ip address (or equivalent DNS).
You c# application would be talking to a service - SQL Server - not reading to/from a database file. The service will handle the interaction with the database. Only the SQL Server service will need to know where the file actually is - your client machines won't know and shouldn't care.
If your background is only with file-based databases - i.e. MS Access, you need to change your mindset a bit about how SQL server works.
You can install a SQL Server Express instance and install the SQL Management Studio Express for all users who need access to the database. The Express Edition is a standard SQL server with limitations regarding the number of processors used, the maximum amount of memory used and the maximum database size. If these limitations don't bother you, it should work fine for you.
Using a network share as a database storage to access db files from several clients is a bad idea, as the sql server instance should always be the only one directly accessing the database, both for read and write access. Configuring several instances of SQL Server to access the same database will probably not work - and if it works, it will probably create havoc in your database files.
I'm working on a program that will work very nicely with a database structure and using mysql. I could easy do this with a common server and common database. However I'm looking for a way to have my client(s) use the program on an offline machine without having to install any database managing software.
Basically I want the installation to set up the necessary tables on their machine and have them fill in the database with information relevant to them. Before I start though I wanted to know if this was possible to connect to and manage a database through a C# application with out installing sql software.
You could consider using SQL Server Compact Edition.
SQLite is another option.
Both of these can be deployed with your application and need no separate configuration.
Yes. It is possible. How to do it exactly depends on the database connection approach you're using. For example, this approach shows how to use DataReaders. That's a very old approach. Modern approaches are recommended to use LINQ to SQL, which can be configured to access remotely by setting up a DataContext to point to an external resource.
Basically, wherever you can define a connection string to connect to a DB, you can make that string point locally or externally. An external resource must obviously be available through some URL in order to connect, of course.
You can not connect to a mysql database without installing mysql.
However you can use in process database like sqlite or Compact SQL. They are not traditional server, but rather a library that keeps the database in a local file.