This is a very elementary doubt as I am trying to build some fundamental knowledge.
I downloaded SSMS in my local machine (laptop). I agree that we can save data/entries in my local machine, but then suppose if I make a web app where users can upload videos/image files, then certainly I cannot or don't want to use my local machine to save their files.
My doubt is, SSMS , i.e., the management studio software which is installed in my local machine , is it possible to use it for online data handling of other users around the world?
Surely, the software must not be only for newbies learning to get a hang of database stuffs in an offline mode, but it must be also used by professionals handling real world data? Do professionals really use the software for their projects?
To a degree, the answer is in the name, SQL Server "MANAGEMENT" Studio. SSMS is a tool for managing SQL Server instances. Whether those are running locally on the machine that has SSMS installed, remotely on some server within your environment, or up on the cloud hosted in Azure, AWS or Google. You can connect to any Microsoft SQL Server instance through SSMS and then you can manipulate the server and the databases within the server. It is a sophisticated tool with a great deal of depth.
It is absolutely not intended to be a front-end for individual users to manipulate the data within a database. Does it have this capacity? Yes, in an extremely limited fashion. It's a very secondary aspect of the tool and not it's primary purpose. See above.
For the kind of data manipulation you're describing, the standard response is to A) Purchase a software designed to manage the data you want, B) Build a tool that does what you need. It's really that simple. For example, you talk about want to manage videos. For option A, you could look to a service such as Vimeo to handle your videos. Or, if what you want is unique, you're going to have to build a new piece of software, option B.
Regardless, SSMS is not the end-user solution. It's absolutely meant as a development and management tool. That's why it's called Management Studio.
Related
I have a questions regarding databases for ASP.Net 4.0 MVC3 (or 4 Beta).
I'm fairly new to the ASP.net MVC environment, and usage of databases in general.
It's stated that the SQL Server Compact is a local database storage. What does this exactly mean? If I were to use this for my web app, would users be able to "access" this database (e.g. register, login), or would I be the only one with access since the file (.sdf) is "local" and is only in my hard disk?
Let's say I'm coding a library management system which would require storage of alot of stuff in the DB. Would it be better to just use the SQL Server Compact that comes with Visual Studio or should I switch to MySQL or some other databases?
I'm asking because I wanna clear everything up before I step into the world of ASP.Net (and since I'll be dealing with DBs alot in future).
The "local" is relative to where the application code runs, not where the user is. If you're using ASP.NET MVC, the application code runs on the server, to the database has to be on the same server. All users using the web application can use it though since the access is done by the application.
I'd use SQL Server Express for that, version 2008 R2 does have a limit of 10GB per database (not including FILESTREAM data AFAIR) but that is already a lot of data. It's free but uses the same engine as the full SQL Server products, but it has some limitations on database size (as mentioned) and resource usage (parallel processing and memory), for many application it is still a perfect solution though.
No, in this case "local" means that it's contained within the package of the web site itself. You'll want to deploy the database file along with the website (but take care not to overwrite it in future subsequent deployments), of course. But the idea is that the database is a file that you put on the server, not a service installed on the server.
Define "a lot of stuff." I doubt you're going to exceed the capacity of SQL Server Compact, or absolutely require features it doesn't provide. You'll want to compare all of the features available in the various databases. (Size limits, native data types, ease of integration, ease of management and deployment, stored procedures, etc.) Chances are any database will work for you, but you'll have to define your needs in more terms than just "a lot of stuff."
1)
SQL SErver Compact edition is a light weight free, embedded, database engine that enables easy database storage. That means you dont need to install any software in a computer for this database to work. you can simply copy the dll of SQL Server compact edition and put in your bin directory and start using it. No additional setup or security permissions are required for it to run.SQL Server CE Stores database as a files on disk. The file extension will be .sdf You can store SQL CE database files within the \App_Data folder of your ASP.NET Web application
Here is how it looks like in a project.
You can do the same things you did with a standard sql server express instance with SQL CE too. So your users would be able to access the data ( thru your application).
2) SQL Server CE would handle this up to an extend. If you have so much data coming in, you probably want to try something bigger like SQL Server express edition etc.. But the migration is easily doable because it is a miniature version of the real SQL Server Database.
If you are in a shread hosting environment and dont have the ability to install / get access to SQL Server instance, you can go with SQL Server CE as it is file based.
This is a good reading to start with : http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2010/06/30/new-embedded-database-support-with-asp-net.aspx
I have a two-part application, where there is a central database that is edited, and then at certain times, the data is released and distributed as its own application. I would like to use a standalone database for the central database (MySQL, Postgres, Oracle, SQL Server, etc.) and then have a reliable export to an embedded database (probably SQLite) for distribution.
What tools/processes are available for such an export, or is it a practice to be avoided?
EDIT: A couple of additional pieces of information. The distributed application should be able to run without having to connect to another server (ex: your spellchecker still works even you don't have internet), and I don't want to install a full DB server for read-only access to the data.
If you really only want your clients to have read-access to the offline data it should not be that difficult to update your client-data manually.
A good practice would be to use the same product for the server database and the client database. You wouldn't have to write SQL-Statements twice since they use the same SOL-Dialect and same features.
Firebird for example offers a server
and an embedded version.
Also Microsoft offers their MS SQL Server
as a mobile version (compact edition) and there are
also Synchronization services
provided by Microsoft (good blog
describing sync services in visual
studio:
http://keithelder.net/blog/archive/2007/09/23/Sync-Services-for-SQL-Server-Compact-Edition-3.5-in-Visual.aspx)
MySQL has a product which is called "MySQLMobile" but I never actually used it.
I can also recommend SQLite as an embedded database since it is very easy to use.
Depending on your bandwidth and data amount you could even download the whole database and delete the old one. (in Firebird for example only copy the database files and it will also work with the mobile version) Very easy - BUT you have to know if it will work for your scenario. If you have more data you will need something more flexible and sophisticated, only updating the data that really changed.
I Want Implement a Software by C#.net.I want Use a DataBase Manager Software like Access or SqlLite or etc.My Program Saved Many Data in Local Machine.
I Do Not Want Publish or Move Data to Other Pcs
What DataBase Manager Software Must be Choose?
Not Different DataBase is Free or have a price.
what is the Best DataBase Manager Software to Save many Data in Local Machine?
For sure you are looking for a free database so for that you can use many databases like mysql ,postgresql , and sql server msde or access
but we still have other scenario, if you are going to distribute this application to other pcs so you have to think about deployment and in this case you can eliminate the mysql , postgresql because they depend on servers but msde (it's also server ) is much easier and you can found alot of tutorials how to deploy it with your project
It depends on how much you are expert in database and for what reason you are using it? are you going to need complex queries or it just a storage place for the data ?
if it's complex query i will go for msde for sql server if it's only for saving information may be i will go for access or even xml
Well if you are developing in C# consider using the MSSql Compact Edition. This allows you to create a local database and use it much like SqlLight. However, the support is much better, especially when you using Visual Studio. There you can find it as LocalDatabase under Data when you adding a new item. (Not 100% sure whether it is present on all versions of VS though).
Firefox has an SQLite Manager add-on.
I think the best choice depends on your needs, for example if you must synchronize data with sql server for me the best choise was sql express.
I would vote for SQL Express. You get essentially a scaled down SQL Server that is capable of working with quite a bit of data. SQL Express plays well with Visual Studio and you will be able to take advantage of the System.Data.SqlClient and related namespaces which come with the .NET framework out of the box. They are also better than the Odbc namespaces. Finally, there is a LOT of online support for SQL Express and, as far as I know, SQL Express's flavor of SQL (T-SQL) is the same as that of SQL Server. So should you one day need the flexibility of running with either or (local database, or server database) you will have it. Also, SQL Express is fairly commonly used in the microsoft world so you should be able to find lots of examples, if need by.
TurboDB for .NET from dataweb is a good solution, if you want a powerful engine with stored procedures and professional support from the manufacturer:
http://www.dataweb.de/en/products/dotnet_database.html
What is currently the best solution for WPF applications which are meant to be used on one computer where various users log into them and use them to get/save information locally? Here's how I see the options:
MDF would seem to be the best choice since I assume you can lock it down quite well so that even though users can access the .mdf file, they still couldn't access the data in it except through the application itself. I assume the .MDF file would have to exist separately from the application so would deploy the .exe and the .mdf file. Oh, if you use an .MDF file, does the user need SQL Server installed to use it as is indicated in this stackoverflow question?
I would think SDF wouldn't be recommended since it has quite a bit of limitations and used mainly for mobile storage.
XML might be appropriate if security didn't matter, e.g. a small one-user application to save data that locally that he wouldn't secure anyway, and this file would be easily accessed by other applications/websites on the computer.
SQLite might be a choice but from what I know the APIs for .NET for this database aren't that robust yet, are they?
.mdb Access might be a choice if you needed users to also edit/view the data or generate reports with Access.
there is also IsolatedStorage but I believe this has serious limitations, doesn't it, e.g. not able to access it from other applications?
perhaps using a cloud service might be feasible and quite straight-forward nowadays, would have to investigate
Would appreciate any feedback or ideas.
SQL Server Compact edition is also an option - http://www.microsoft.com/Sqlserver/2005/en/us/compact.aspx
Deployment is pretty easy using ClickOnce or by copying the engine dlls to the application directory.
I would choose SQLite. You can get the ADO.NET Compatible driver here:
System.Data.SQLite
I'd say SQLite. It's incredibly light-weight and easy to use, and the API is fine. You could always use DbLinq as ORM.
SQL Server Compact edition is my choice because of the following benefits:
A small runtime library that you can distribute with your app
Compatible with Linq to Sql (search "SqlMetal.exe")
Integrated design experience with Visual Studio 2008
It's a nice all rounder as a lightweight solution for a .NET app.
http://www.microsoft.com/Sqlserver/2008/en/us/compact.aspx
MDF does seem to be the most flexible solution but user need to have SQL server express installed to use it.
How do you plan on executing CRUD processes? If you are wanting to use Linq to SQL you are kinda limited offically it only supports SQL 2005, Sql 2008 and Sql Compact.
Also, does the application need to be disconnect, partially, fully connected to the internet? That may put some weight on your decision.
IMO, I would start with SQL Server Compact edition and if that was too limiting move to sql server express. (.MDF)
Could the SQL Server IDE ever become an application development platform for enterprise applications? In a similar way to the old xBase applications, but, you know, better?
The main reason is that the Management Studio is one of the best “data centric” application I’ve ever used. It has most of the main ingredients for the proposed solutions:
powerful data manipulation language (SQL :o) )
good security
distributed architecture
The main features that it lacks:
a GUI toolkit: something simple and standard, enterprise applications usually don’t require fancy UIs
some form of automation (.Net, COM, I really don’t care as long as it works)
MS Office integration (especially Excel)
So…?
UPDATE:
The question above is a request for feedback on an idea. I'm not planning to use SSMS to build an interactive application in the near future. I would really like to hear what do you think about it and what other suggestions you might have (maybe there is already a product which does exactly that).
A shorter text for the question would be "If SSMS and MS Access could marry, how would their child look like?"
2nd UPDATE:
"Microsoft announces its new product codename 'Frankenstein'. The new product tries to combine the ease of development of database applications from the old Fox Pro and Access times, with the brand new SQL Server 2012 suite. As 'Frankenstein's Product Manager, Jim Bob, stated "[Frankenstein] will enable the developers to shut the f*#k up, and just build that thing already. Not spend their (highly remunerated) time arguing what's the best ORM, or AJAX toolkit, or should they use SOA etc... (btw, since 2009, SOA is dead)"
Well it depends on what way you look at it.
You can extend and build plugins for management studio but you can also use the visual studio shell as the base for new applications (altho I don't think this is what you want?)
However re-reading your question it looks like you actually want to build applications for SQL server. In that case you might want to check out Visual Studio Team Systems Database Edition
There's two risks involved with building applications on top of SQL Server Management Studio.
First, SQL Server Management Studio has been fairly consistent from 2005 to 2008, but that's only three years of release time. SQL Server 2000's tools were dramatically different, and there's no reason to expect SQL Server management tools to always remain the same.
For example, at the Professional Association for SQL Server (PASS) Summit in Seattle in 2008, Microsoft demoed a new management framework for SQL Server. The databases will be packaged and managed in a way quite different from what we're used to in SSMS. Project Kilimanjaro (think of it as SQL 2008 R2) will be the "down payment" on that management, with the rest of the tools coming in later versions. SSMS will look, feel and work differently in order to accomodate this new way of building database-driven applications.
Second, Microsoft's architecture for SSMS is not pluggable, and they haven't encouraged any third party development inside SSMS that I'm aware of. You can build some level of interactivity by using RDLC reports - standalone SQL Server Reporting Services applications that run inside SSMS - but for the most part, you're not encouraged to build atop SSMS because they do want the right to change it when they need to improve it.
I've got good news, though - you mentioned that you'd want some kind of Office tie-in. Keep your eye out for Project Gemini announcements. Donald Farmer did demos of it at PASS, and there's probably some video circulating around. It uses Excel as a front end for BI analytics, and they used million-row-spreadsheets that were storing data back in SQL. There's not much out out yet for the public, but keep your eyes peeled.
To answer the shorter question - Have you seen the various Frankenstein films?
The longer question - why would you want it to, you already have Visual Studio? SSMS is an excellent environment for developing stored procedures, queries, views and the like, lets leave it that way. And anyhow, the only good XBase environment was FoxPro and look where that ended up.