| Groups | Blog | Home |
vb.net data : Which database?/SQL Server License
systems. Each has its own issues and limitations. A common approach that some people use is to switch paradigms to ASP (web)-based architecture. In this case you would setup a central IIS server visible to all users and write a web site to host the data. This system needs to be robust and up to date--but none of the others need to be. This central server would host SQL Server (even the Express (free) version). The advantage here is anyone with a browser (any browser) can access your application. The disadvantage here is that if you've never written/supported a web site, you have a long, hilly road ahead of you. The other alternative is to transition to SQL Express from JET/Access. No, you don't want to get tied up in MSDE at this point unless the systems MUST run the database engine. In situations like yours I've had a lot of luck writing front-end applications that work on older systems. This way you put SQL Express on a single (up-to-date) system and expose it to the LAN. Again, this has security implications but it can be managed if you're careful and you know what you're doing. However, consider that you would have to write the client code using tools that work on the oldest of these systems which leaves much of the newest technology (and security) behind. No, VB.NET won't work on older platforms. I expect you'll have to use the (no longer supported) VB6 tools. I discuss these alternatives in more detail in my book... hth -- ____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [quoted text, click to view] "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> wrote in message news:459fec31$0$24051$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... > Hello, > > I am currently writing a database application which uses ADO. > However as I experience a runtime error 3014 (Can't open any more tables) > I want to move away from Access databases as backend. > > The application I work on is for schools, so I do not expect state of the > art computers and need to consider resources. This is why I chose Access > databases in the first place. > > Currently I use 3 databases (1 for main data, 1 for translation, 1 for > lists). > > I have Visual Studio 2003 and SQL Server 2000. > > My questions are: > > * If I use SQL Server 2000 as backend, do my customers have to buy a > separate license for SQL server or can they just use my software with SQL > Server 2000? Are there any limitations (number of users etc.)? > > * Are there any other freeware databases which do not use much resources? > One of my goals is that they run on Windows 98 and later (and Win98 > computers usually do not have much RAM installed). > > I'm grateful for any suggestions. > > Thanks in advance! > > Best regards, > > HKSHK
If your customers have already purchased SQL Server 2000 then they can use
it with your application (assuming they have a server processor license or each of their client computers has a client license). In case your customers do not have SQL Server then see the options below. If you develop your application on SQL Server 2000 then you best choice would be using MSDE (basically a trimmed down version of SQL Server). It is free to distribute and provides almost the same capabilities as SQL Server 2000. Also, it will support older operating systems like Windows 98. Here is more info on MSDE: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/msde/prodinfo.mspx http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/msde/sysreqs.mspx http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/2000/default.mspx Have in mind that MSDE is not supported on Vista. If you have computers running Vista you can use SQL Server 2005 Express (which is the successor for MSDE): http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/overview.mspx http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/sysreqs.mspx Note that you cannot use SQL Server 2005 Express on Windows 98. Regards, Plamen Ratchev http://www.SQLStudio.com [quoted text, click to view] "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> wrote in message news:459fec31$0$24051$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... > Hello, > > I am currently writing a database application which uses ADO. > However as I experience a runtime error 3014 (Can't open any more tables) > I want to move away from Access databases as backend. > > The application I work on is for schools, so I do not expect state of the > art computers and need to consider resources. This is why I chose Access > databases in the first place. > > Currently I use 3 databases (1 for main data, 1 for translation, 1 for > lists). > > I have Visual Studio 2003 and SQL Server 2000. > > My questions are: > > * If I use SQL Server 2000 as backend, do my customers have to buy a > separate license for SQL server or can they just use my software with SQL > Server 2000? Are there any limitations (number of users etc.)? > > * Are there any other freeware databases which do not use much resources? > One of my goals is that they run on Windows 98 and later (and Win98 > computers usually do not have much RAM installed). > > I'm grateful for any suggestions. > > Thanks in advance! > > Best regards, > > HKSHK
All versions of SQL Server are designed with the ability to limit access to
the server via a UserName/Password scheme. This can be configured to permit a designated user full or highly focused access to the database(s), tables, procedures, views and more. Can this scheme be defeated? Sure it can as can most security schemes. It's a lot safer than Access/JET but not foolproof. SQL Server Compact edition does support full database encryption/password protection--which is different than any other version. AFA users, that really depends on a number of factors. I've seen SQL Server databases support thousands of users on an old 386/33 processor with less RAM than a cheap digital camera. I've also seen the most recent versions of SQL Server struggle to support two users. As I describe in the book, scalability and performance have as much to do with design and implementation as they do the engine. If you can build suitable apps with VS2003 then go for it. This exposes 90% of ADO.NET (the rest is exposed on 2.0) and is still supported. I expect the book will save you a lot of time if you're taking a Windows Forms approach... hth -- ____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [quoted text, click to view] "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> wrote in message news:45a02066$0$24099$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... > Dear Bill, > >> The other alternative is to transition to SQL Express from JET/Access. >> No, you don't want to get tied up in MSDE at this point unless the >> systems MUST run the database engine. In situations like yours I've had a >> lot of luck writing front-end applications that work on older systems. >> This way you put SQL Express on a single (up-to-date) system and expose >> it to the LAN. Again, this has security implications but it can be >> managed if you're careful and you know what you're doing. > > Do you know if SQL Server Express 2005 can create password protected > databases? Do you know how many connections it can handle and how many > databases at one time? > >> However, consider that you would have to write the client code using >> tools that work on the oldest of these systems which leaves much of the >> newest technology (and security) behind. No, VB.NET won't work on older >> platforms. I expect you'll have to use the (no longer supported) VB6 >> tools. > > I'm using VB.NET 2003, which runs on Windows 98/ME/2000/XP and should also > run on Vista. This is why I would like to avoid any FW 2.0 stuff as it > will only run on XP Vista. > > Best regards, > > HKSHK
Hello,
I am currently writing a database application which uses ADO. However as I experience a runtime error 3014 (Can't open any more tables) I want to move away from Access databases as backend. The application I work on is for schools, so I do not expect state of the art computers and need to consider resources. This is why I chose Access databases in the first place. Currently I use 3 databases (1 for main data, 1 for translation, 1 for lists). I have Visual Studio 2003 and SQL Server 2000. My questions are: * If I use SQL Server 2000 as backend, do my customers have to buy a separate license for SQL server or can they just use my software with SQL Server 2000? Are there any limitations (number of users etc.)? * Are there any other freeware databases which do not use much resources? One of my goals is that they run on Windows 98 and later (and Win98 computers usually do not have much RAM installed). I'm grateful for any suggestions. Thanks in advance! Best regards,
Hello HKSHK,
One option is to use MS SQL 2005 Express. You can also consider using MySQL. Jos Roijakkers mailto:j.roijakkers@qred-it.nl [quoted text, click to view] > Hello, > > I am currently writing a database application which uses ADO. However > as I experience a runtime error 3014 (Can't open any more tables) I > want to move away from Access databases as backend. > > The application I work on is for schools, so I do not expect state of > the art computers and need to consider resources. This is why I chose > Access databases in the first place. > > Currently I use 3 databases (1 for main data, 1 for translation, 1 for > lists). > > I have Visual Studio 2003 and SQL Server 2000. > > My questions are: > > * If I use SQL Server 2000 as backend, do my customers have to buy a > separate license for SQL server or can they just use my software with > SQL Server 2000? Are there any limitations (number of users etc.)? > > * Are there any other freeware databases which do not use much > resources? One of my goals is that they run on Windows 98 and later > (and Win98 computers usually do not have much RAM installed). > > I'm grateful for any suggestions. > > Thanks in advance! > > Best regards, > > HKSHK >
Dear Bill,
[quoted text, click to view] > The other alternative is to transition to SQL Express from JET/Access. No, > you don't want to get tied up in MSDE at this point unless the systems MUST > run the database engine. In situations like yours I've had a lot of luck > writing front-end applications that work on older systems. This way you put > SQL Express on a single (up-to-date) system and expose it to the LAN. Again, > this has security implications but it can be managed if you're careful and > you know what you're doing. Do you know if SQL Server Express 2005 can create password protected databases? Do you know how many connections it can handle and how many databases at one time? [quoted text, click to view] > However, consider that you would have to write > the client code using tools that work on the oldest of these systems which > leaves much of the newest technology (and security) behind. No, VB.NET won't > work on older platforms. I expect you'll have to use the (no longer > supported) VB6 tools. I'm using VB.NET 2003, which runs on Windows 98/ME/2000/XP and should also run on Vista. This is why I would like to avoid any FW 2.0 stuff as it will only run on XP Vista. Best regards,
Thanks a lot for the responses so far.
I'm currently checking Firebird and it seems that it is what I'm looking for (it can run on Win9x/NT/2000/XP) and (they say that) it needs not much resources. However, has anyone some experience with Firebird in combination with ..NET (preferably VB.NET 2003)? I know that they offer a .NET Data Provider, but it's FW 2.0, so it's no use for me. I would appreciate your comments. Thanks a lot! Best regards, HKSHK
Earlier I posted two options: SQL Server 2005 Express and MSDE. I listed
MSDE only because you mention it is a requirement to be supported on Windows 98 (that is to have the database installed on Windows 98). As Bill indicated a better design approach is to use a central application model with IIS and SQL Server 2005 Express as a back end. If it is not possible to implement this and you need to install your application and database on each computer (including the Windows 98 computers) I believe MSDE is still your best option. Both SQL Server 2005 Express and MSDE can be bundled in your installation program and really no need for your customers to download anything. And they are both very secure databases. Please take a look at the following articles: https://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/securingsqlserver.mspx http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/sp3sec04.mspx http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sql_server_security_best_practices.htm Although the articles are related to SQL Server 2000 the information is correct for both SQL Server 2000 Express (actually has even better security) and MSDE. And here are two articles from independent sources that just confirm that: 1). SQL Server vs. Oracle - Which Database is More Secure? A very good and interesting white paper by David Litchfield from Next Generation Security Software comparing the numbers of security flaws identified by external security researchers and subsequently fixed by Oracle and Microsoft in regard to their database products. http://www.ngssoftware.com/research/papers/comparison.pdf 2). SQL Server is The Safest Database According to this study from the Enterprise Strategy Group, Oracle has 70 vulnerabilities, MySQL has 59, Sybase has seven, IBM's DB2 has four, and SQL Server has just two. http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=110881&WT.svl=news1_3 I have been in a very similar situation. The requirements were to support older operating systems like Windows 98, both the application and database had to be installed on one or a small group of computers, the client has no IT staff to support IIS and needs to install the application at different locations just by using the installation program. That ruled out the possibility to have an IIS based application. It started as a database application in Access (that was very long time ago). Over time Access proved to have a few issues. When running on low end computers (like Windows 98 based) it is very common for the computer to crash. That can be very damaging to the Access database and sometimes it is not possible to recover data. Also, Access is missing some of the very good database features like transaction support, good security, etc. And as data grows the performance can go down. After one year of using Access I moved the database to MSDE 2000. That was a significant improvement in all areas. Now after a crash MSDE handles automatic database file recover and we had no lost transactions. Also, our application provides backup and restore based on the SQL Server functions. Currently the application is migrating to SQL Server 2005 Express. There will be still a version with MSDE for support of older operating systems, but SQL Server 2005 Express will be the choice for any new installation (and the installation package can be intelligent to offer both choices based on the operating system). You can also take a look at the SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/compact/default.mspx Regards, Plamen Ratchev http://www.SQLStudio.com [quoted text, click to view] "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> wrote in message news:45a0c37d$0$13620$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... >I finished my check of Firebird. > > Due to its design Firebird is not a secure database. That means that > everybody who can access the database file can access any data in it. > > So Firebird is not an option. > > I also checked Oracle 10g XE. However it requires Windows 2000 or newer > and min 256 MB of RAM. So this is also not an option. > > It seems that I have to go back to JET... as MS SQL Server would either > require my customers to buy licenses or to download and install SQL Server > 2005 Express Edition on a Windows XP machine. > > If anyone has a suggestion for a secure database - I'm always open to > suggestions. > > Thanks to all of you! > > Best regards, > > HKSHK
I finished my check of Firebird.
Due to its design Firebird is not a secure database. That means that everybody who can access the database file can access any data in it. So Firebird is not an option. I also checked Oracle 10g XE. However it requires Windows 2000 or newer and min 256 MB of RAM. So this is also not an option. It seems that I have to go back to JET... as MS SQL Server would either require my customers to buy licenses or to download and install SQL Server 2005 Express Edition on a Windows XP machine. If anyone has a suggestion for a secure database - I'm always open to suggestions. Thanks to all of you! Best regards,
Two more things:
1). If you have to go with MSDE you are really not locked into it. The upgrade path to SQL Server 2005 Express is very easy and well supported (as well it can be fully automated). Of course, as long as the minimum requirement for SQL Server 2005 Express are met. 2). Both SQL Server 2005 Express and MSDE are supported by the Enterprise Library Data Application Blocks. It is a great library based on best practices and it has saved many hours of development. As you are using .NET 1.1 you would have to use version 1.1 (from June 2005). Here is the link: http://www.codeplex.com/entlib Regards, Plamen Ratchev http://www.SQLStudio.com [quoted text, click to view] "Plamen Ratchev" <Plamen@SQLStudio.com> wrote in message news:eu9%23jymMHHA.1008@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Earlier I posted two options: SQL Server 2005 Express and MSDE. I listed > MSDE only because you mention it is a requirement to be supported on > Windows 98 (that is to have the database installed on Windows 98). As Bill > indicated a better design approach is to use a central application model > with IIS and SQL Server 2005 Express as a back end. If it is not possible > to implement this and you need to install your application and database on > each computer (including the Windows 98 computers) I believe MSDE is still > your best option. > > Both SQL Server 2005 Express and MSDE can be bundled in your installation > program and really no need for your customers to download anything. And > they are both very secure databases. Please take a look at the following > articles: > https://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/securingsqlserver.mspx > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/sp3sec04.mspx > http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sql_server_security_best_practices.htm > > Although the articles are related to SQL Server 2000 the information is > correct for both SQL Server 2000 Express (actually has even better > security) and MSDE. And here are two articles from independent sources > that just confirm that: > > 1). SQL Server vs. Oracle - Which Database is More Secure? > A very good and interesting white paper by David Litchfield from Next > Generation Security Software comparing the numbers of security flaws > identified by external security researchers and subsequently fixed by > Oracle and Microsoft in regard to their database products. > http://www.ngssoftware.com/research/papers/comparison.pdf > > 2). SQL Server is The Safest Database > According to this study from the Enterprise Strategy Group, Oracle has 70 > vulnerabilities, MySQL has 59, Sybase has seven, IBM's DB2 has four, and > SQL Server has just two. > http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=110881&WT.svl=news1_3 > > I have been in a very similar situation. The requirements were to support > older operating systems like Windows 98, both the application and database > had to be installed on one or a small group of computers, the client has > no IT staff to support IIS and needs to install the application at > different locations just by using the installation program. That ruled out > the possibility to have an IIS based application. > > It started as a database application in Access (that was very long time > ago). Over time Access proved to have a few issues. When running on low > end computers (like Windows 98 based) it is very common for the computer > to crash. That can be very damaging to the Access database and sometimes > it is not possible to recover data. Also, Access is missing some of the > very good database features like transaction support, good security, etc. > And as data grows the performance can go down. After one year of using > Access I moved the database to MSDE 2000. That was a significant > improvement in all areas. Now after a crash MSDE handles automatic > database file recover and we had no lost transactions. Also, our > application provides backup and restore based on the SQL Server functions. > Currently the application is migrating to SQL Server 2005 Express. There > will be still a version with MSDE for support of older operating systems, > but SQL Server 2005 Express will be the choice for any new installation > (and the installation package can be intelligent to offer both choices > based on the operating system). > > You can also take a look at the SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition: > http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/compact/default.mspx > > Regards, > > Plamen Ratchev > http://www.SQLStudio.com > > "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> wrote in message > news:45a0c37d$0$13620$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... >>I finished my check of Firebird. >> >> Due to its design Firebird is not a secure database. That means that >> everybody who can access the database file can access any data in it. >> >> So Firebird is not an option. >> >> I also checked Oracle 10g XE. However it requires Windows 2000 or newer >> and min 256 MB of RAM. So this is also not an option. >> >> It seems that I have to go back to JET... as MS SQL Server would either >> require my customers to buy licenses or to download and install SQL >> Server 2005 Express Edition on a Windows XP machine. >> >> If anyone has a suggestion for a secure database - I'm always open to >> suggestions. >> >> Thanks to all of you! >> >> Best regards, >> >> HKSHK > >
This is a great response. Thanks for taking the time to provide a
well-written answer. -- ____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [quoted text, click to view] "Plamen Ratchev" <Plamen@SQLStudio.com> wrote in message news:eu9%23jymMHHA.1008@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Earlier I posted two options: SQL Server 2005 Express and MSDE. I listed > MSDE only because you mention it is a requirement to be supported on > Windows 98 (that is to have the database installed on Windows 98). As Bill > indicated a better design approach is to use a central application model > with IIS and SQL Server 2005 Express as a back end. If it is not possible > to implement this and you need to install your application and database on > each computer (including the Windows 98 computers) I believe MSDE is still > your best option. > > Both SQL Server 2005 Express and MSDE can be bundled in your installation > program and really no need for your customers to download anything. And > they are both very secure databases. Please take a look at the following > articles: > https://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/securingsqlserver.mspx > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/sp3sec04.mspx > http://vyaskn.tripod.com/sql_server_security_best_practices.htm > > Although the articles are related to SQL Server 2000 the information is > correct for both SQL Server 2000 Express (actually has even better > security) and MSDE. And here are two articles from independent sources > that just confirm that: > > 1). SQL Server vs. Oracle - Which Database is More Secure? > A very good and interesting white paper by David Litchfield from Next > Generation Security Software comparing the numbers of security flaws > identified by external security researchers and subsequently fixed by > Oracle and Microsoft in regard to their database products. > http://www.ngssoftware.com/research/papers/comparison.pdf > > 2). SQL Server is The Safest Database > According to this study from the Enterprise Strategy Group, Oracle has 70 > vulnerabilities, MySQL has 59, Sybase has seven, IBM's DB2 has four, and > SQL Server has just two. > http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=110881&WT.svl=news1_3 > > I have been in a very similar situation. The requirements were to support > older operating systems like Windows 98, both the application and database > had to be installed on one or a small group of computers, the client has > no IT staff to support IIS and needs to install the application at > different locations just by using the installation program. That ruled out > the possibility to have an IIS based application. > > It started as a database application in Access (that was very long time > ago). Over time Access proved to have a few issues. When running on low > end computers (like Windows 98 based) it is very common for the computer > to crash. That can be very damaging to the Access database and sometimes > it is not possible to recover data. Also, Access is missing some of the > very good database features like transaction support, good security, etc. > And as data grows the performance can go down. After one year of using > Access I moved the database to MSDE 2000. That was a significant > improvement in all areas. Now after a crash MSDE handles automatic > database file recover and we had no lost transactions. Also, our > application provides backup and restore based on the SQL Server functions. > Currently the application is migrating to SQL Server 2005 Express. There > will be still a version with MSDE for support of older operating systems, > but SQL Server 2005 Express will be the choice for any new installation > (and the installation package can be intelligent to offer both choices > based on the operating system). > > You can also take a look at the SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition: > http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/compact/default.mspx > > Regards, > > Plamen Ratchev > http://www.SQLStudio.com > > "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> wrote in message > news:45a0c37d$0$13620$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... >>I finished my check of Firebird. >> >> Due to its design Firebird is not a secure database. That means that >> everybody who can access the database file can access any data in it. >> >> So Firebird is not an option. >> >> I also checked Oracle 10g XE. However it requires Windows 2000 or newer >> and min 256 MB of RAM. So this is also not an option. >> >> It seems that I have to go back to JET... as MS SQL Server would either >> require my customers to buy licenses or to download and install SQL >> Server 2005 Express Edition on a Windows XP machine. >> >> If anyone has a suggestion for a secure database - I'm always open to >> suggestions. >> >> Thanks to all of you! >> >> Best regards, >> >> HKSHK > >
SQL Server Express is free. It does not require a special license or a
runtime fee. Yes, if you insist on using a client-centric database approach as heavy as SQL Server, the clients are going to need to install it. This either means a one-time download or CD-delivery. Do not discount SQL Server Compact Edition. It can be installed/deployed as 7 (or fewer) DLLs with your application which will also have to be "downloaded". It can be fully secured (encrypted from top to bottom) and while its more limited than SQL Server (and the others), its fast, safe and efficient and might meet your needs completely. hth -- ____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [quoted text, click to view] "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> wrote in message news:45a0c37d$0$13620$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... >I finished my check of Firebird. > > Due to its design Firebird is not a secure database. That means that > everybody who can access the database file can access any data in it. > > So Firebird is not an option. > > I also checked Oracle 10g XE. However it requires Windows 2000 or newer > and min 256 MB of RAM. So this is also not an option. > > It seems that I have to go back to JET... as MS SQL Server would either > require my customers to buy licenses or to download and install SQL Server > 2005 Express Edition on a Windows XP machine. > > If anyone has a suggestion for a secure database - I'm always open to > suggestions. > > Thanks to all of you! > > Best regards, > > HKSHK
I was also in this situation , and had given up
I checked almost every DB availlable at that time ( MSSQL , Firebird , Oracle , DB2 ,SQLLITE etc etc ) They were or not protectable from the system administrator , or they were to expensive to deploy to my + 20.000 userbase , some small vendors who claimed to have an alternativ were simply to slow although the claims on there website said the opposite i did some benchmarking of my own and found out that in speed the MS products are unbeatable on windows systems . However As Bill describes above in the newer versions of SQL you can protect the database just as ACCESS ( i guess you use Access in combination with a workgroup file ) , I remember to had some discussions with Bill at that time about the security thingy he told me then that there was a beta version of SQL that is protectable , so we decided to wait for this version and stick with Access for that moment . They ( i do not work with this company annymore ) have solved the issue now by raising the program specifications ( in a frame of one year ) so probably in a few months from now the program is deployed with an encrypted / protected MDF regards michel posseth "HKSHK" <hkshk@gmx.net> schreef in bericht news:45a0c37d$0$13620$9b622d9e@news.freenet.de... [quoted text, click to view] >I finished my check of Firebird. > > Due to its design Firebird is not a secure database. That means that > everybody who can access the database file can access any data in it. > > So Firebird is not an option. > > I also checked Oracle 10g XE. However it requires Windows 2000 or newer > and min 256 MB of RAM. So this is also not an option. > > It seems that I have to go back to JET... as MS SQL Server would either > require my customers to buy licenses or to download and install SQL Server > 2005 Express Edition on a Windows XP machine. > > If anyone has a suggestion for a secure database - I'm always open to > suggestions. > > Thanks to all of you! > > Best regards, > > HKSHK
Dear Plamen, dear Bill,
Thanks a lot for your suggestions! I'm really considering going SQL Server Compact Edition. The only bad thing is that it requires FW 2.0 while I wanted to stick with FW 1.1... I really have to think about that. Using MSDE would not really help as Vista is coming soon and I want my software also to run on it, too. So I have to choose if I either stick with Jet or if I make a clean cut and use SQL Server Compact Edition. Again, thanks a lot for your suggestions! Best regards, HKSHK
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |