I've never done databases before but I know that you can create them on MySQL, the thing is that I want to be able to write/read a database locally and not have to send/receive any information online as it would be too slow for what I need.
Is there a way to create a stand alone database (possibly on MySQL then downloading it) and write/read from it using LUA?
Thanks for any information, as I say, never touched databases.
Yes it is.
You can download sqlite3, which is a simple SQL relational DB. Basically this type of DB is just a file (.db extension), so you can have it locally on you PC and also exchange it between many machines easily.
From a Lua standpoint, what you need is a library to access your DB and I think LuaSQLIte3 is the best option to go with. Check this SO post for a basic example on this.
IMO using lua in conjunction with sqlite3 is one of the best choices when one wants to have a (light) SQL-based DB locally, without the added "complexity" of a more commercially used DB (e.g.postgres).
Related
well for example you have build a program, for restaurant, for a cinema, wherever,
now how do you do when, you install your application, the database was installed correctly too? i dont sure but i believe this is a different database? for example a file?
(talking about sql).
and how different are going to be the queries? cuz i believe i am not going to have the same function on sql server than a file database
and what connection i shall use?
could i use entity framework?
and how capacity could to have the different file for databases?
regards
You can use a file-based database like SQLite that supports SQL queries. There are ADO adapters available as well. The link should take care of the rest of your questions as well.
Well, since you usually have absolutely no knowledge about target environment, user must configure program to his envronment at install time, or later (af first launch for example, this is much simplier than implement same functionality in installer). User specifies SQL server address (if we are talking about server-based systems) and database name he wants to use. Then database is created programmaticaly using that information.
I have installed Oracle XE. I build small database every day to practice from command prompt, but now I want to have more. I want to have a bigger database with a lot of different data to practice and make exercises.
So, is possible to get a big data file from somewhere and upload to XE database?
You can't get 'big' data for Oracle Express edition as it is limited to 4GB (10g) or 10GB (11g ).
That said, there are public datasets available. Personally I like the FAA data on registered aircraft owners/operators
As you are practicing with Oracle, perhaps a good solution (which will also generate exactly the data you need) would be to write your own stored procedures to generate your data in a loop (or similar construct).
You could then generate as much as you like whilst also practicing your handling of large datasets and writing of efficient PL/SQL and SQL code.
This way your data will match your current database structure too without having to build a new database matching whichever dataset you download from the web.
IIRC there are sample schemas as HR that can be enabled. See this.
Scenario
i want to take backup from 7 client database to 1 server database.
i dont know structure of the db { either server or client db }.
both databases are having old data. now i have to make the tool take the backup for that.
and should possible to backup old data also[if any updates done on old data.]
please help to find the solution for this.
1. how can i proceed with the problem.
2. database not specified, may be MS access or Sql server 2005
3. In which i can implement this [ I am thinking of doing it in c#]
please help me to find the solution
I'm not sure why you would want to go about it this way - if you are merely trying to copy the client databases (which I interpret as being "file based") then why not simply take copies of their files as part of the wider backup strategy?
If you to write the backup stuff to place all the data in a server based RDBMS, then you are also going to have to think about how you restore that information later on - which presumably means even more coding for you.
So - I don't think this is a good idea, but if you are determined, I would start off by writing a class (which will be almost abstract) dedicated to the purpose of reading the structure of the client database (tables, fields, views etc). I'd then inherit from that to get a specific class for doing this for each individual type of client DB. Once you have that, you can use ADO.Net to read values from the tables in the Client DB, populate datatables with the information, and then write that information back out to the Server based DB.
I really can't stress enough though that I don't like this idea - it seems overly complicated, and also won't deal with functions etc.
Good luck anyway,
Martin
Advisability of doing this aside, one simple answer for a particular subset of the problem would be to create a DSN for a target SQL Server (or any server database) and in Access export table by table to the DSN. You can do this through the Access UI and it can be automated within Access with DoCmd.TransferDatabase. It can be a little fiddly figuring out the proper connect string, and you'd also need to do something about renaming the exported tables so there are no collisions between databases, but that can be handled quite easily in a bit of VBA code.
I post this only because many people overlook the Access capability to export to an ODBC DSN, which requires no writing of DDL and so forth. It may or may not make correct choices about target data types, though, so you'd have to see in any particular situation if it's good enough or not.
I have been working on VB6 database desktop programming, but now a client is asking for a
simple web interface (some inserts into SQL Server db used by a desktop application).
The question is: Which approach is better?
1)creating asp.net project, connected directly to the SQL Server database;
2)creating separate (simple) mysql database managed by php and synchronization (in 15 minutes for example)
Thanks.
Personally since you already have the SQL Server database, I see no reason whatsoever to add the complexity of another database and then synchonization. The first alternative is simpler to create and can be secure if you design it correctly. The issue about hosting is irrelevant since you are going to your own database that already exists, so is the issue about cost since the databse is already there. Further since you are already supporting SQL Server, you may be able to reuse some code rather than write new code (mysql's version of SQL is not the same as SQl Server's version). Synching the two databases may be more complex than you think (differnt data types, etc.) and the data in the real database is not real-time whereas with the first alternative it is.
I'd prefer the separate database approach.
It's more secure.
PHP/Mysql hosting is widespread
You can pretty much achieve anything with the technologies available, it just depends on your skill and productivity with specific technologies and the availability of online help. Plus Microsoft stuff you tend to have to pay for whereas PHP/MySQL is totally free.
Is it possible to store Subversion meta data in SQL Server? We want a SQL Server based Subversion.
There isn't anyway to do that right now. Subversion lets you choose between FSFS and Berkeley DB, with FSFS being the better choice for most people. (Berkeley DB has some issues around getting corrupt).
Is there a reason you want to store the data in SQL Server?
I with James Avery - why do you want to store the data in an SQL Server? If you're wanting someway to interface with the underlying subversion data from a .NET library, check out SharpSVN: http://sharpsvn.open.collab.net/.
Subversion used to have BDB (Berkley Database) as its core storage. Most people moved away from that because it was hard to back up and corruption sometimes became an issue. I wouldn't recommend it but I am sure you could go look at the BDB code and have it hook up to a SQL Server.
Why use a backing store that you can so easily corrupt? Sure, you can corrupt the filesystem store, but most people have enough sense not to touch it.
As it is, future versions of SVN are looking to store revprop data in a sqlite db instead of files. If they do, then you should be able to access that in much the same way, but for the mutable revprops only. I'm not sure if they intend to restrict access to it to the svn libraries of allow any other process to read and write to it.
Of course, the biggest reason SQL server is not suitable for subversion is that it would completely break its ability to be cross-platform.