| Groups | Blog | Home |
dotnet ado.net : I need an advice...
Your requirements are the same as many, many others and can be solved fairly simply and cheaply. Since you have so few users you can get away with using SQL Server Express edition (the free version) on the server. You don't need a server-side application (like a Web Service) or an ASP.NET approach. Create a Windows Forms application to connect to the SQL Server (which must be configured to work on the LAN (Intranet) as it's default configuration makes it invisible to the LAN. My book should help quite a bit with this approach as it discusses virtually every aspect of the system. Be sure to buy Visual Studio Professional or better as the tools in the Express version are really not sufficient to help. You'll also want to get the SQL Server Management Studio Express toolkit (free) download. Good luck. 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] "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message news:45939c3a$0$4259$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... > Hello, > > maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. > Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They just > need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they need > to access this database from some other computers, with client > applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. > What is the best approach I can follow to do this? > I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the > server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the > other computers, deals with the first one. > In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? Web > service? Windows service? Something else? > Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the > database directly through the lan network? > Or maybe nothing I just wrote... > > Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to > approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. > How to do it will come later. > > I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. > > Thank you in advance and happy 2007! > > Fabrizio >
Timestamp concurrency is easy and relatively foolproof. Now that the
CommandBuilder recognizes it, Visual Studio can help build the code as well. I expect ORM is overkill for this project. Stick with simple approaches. -- ____________________________________ 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] "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message news:4593e857$0$4247$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... > Well, to handle concurrency there are different ways. > I was thinking about storing in a table the timestamp of last read/write > access and when a user submits his modifications I'm going to ask for > confirmation in case someone has retrieved that data after him. > But this will depend on requirement I haven't been given yet. > I'll take a look at that ORM you suggest, honestly I don't know what it > is. > > Thanks again, > Fabrizio > > "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message > news:%23I78WMpKHHA.4384@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> >> "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message >> news:4593d97d$0$19106$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... >>> Hi Miha, >>> >>> yes, there are a few people working on it and it has to run in intranet. >>> I'm not worried about complexity, since I have already written db >>> applications and remoting applications too. >>> I was just asking because I have never combined the 2 things and wanted >>> to be sure about that being a good idea. >> >> It is certainly better than doing direct database access. Yet, it is more >> complex. Perhaps you might even consider using a ORM (LLBLGenPro >> recommended). >> >>> My dubts came out for concurrecy problems, which I think I could handle >>> better if I had some application running on the server. >> >> Define better :-) >> How do you handle concurrency? Simplest way would be to store modified >> data in a transaction and if it fails, it fails. User should reload data >> and modify it again. While it can be problematic (for user to modify data >> again) it is quite doable since usually there aren't many concurrency >> clashes. Again, it depends on application. >> >>> And also, since the final price is always important expecially for small >>> companies I have to check if I can do it the easy way (fat client with >>> direct connection) with sqlexpress. >> >> Also consider using an ORM (see above). It will do much of the >> database-related work for you. >> >>> >>> Thank you for your advices. >> >> You're welcome. >> -- >> Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] >> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com >> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ > >
Hello,
maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They just need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they need to access this database from some other computers, with client applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. What is the best approach I can follow to do this? I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the other computers, deals with the first one. In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? Web service? Windows service? Something else? Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the database directly through the lan network? Or maybe nothing I just wrote... Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. How to do it will come later. I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. Thank you in advance and happy 2007! Fabrizio
[quoted text, click to view]
> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the You are living in 2006 not in 1975> database directly through the lan network? > Cor
Hi Fabrizio,
[quoted text, click to view] "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message news:45939c3a$0$4259$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... > Hello, > > maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. > Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They just > need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they need > to access this database from some other computers, with client > applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. > What is the best approach I can follow to do this? Depends on the requirements (security, scalability, etc.). Since there aren't many users and, I presume application runs on intranet, I would go with 2-tiers (fat client connects directly to the database) as it is easiest to build. [quoted text, click to view] > I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the > server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the > other computers, deals with the first one. This is a better but more complicated/complex approach. [quoted text, click to view] > In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? Web > service? Windows service? Something else? If client is always a .net then you should definitely go with remoting. If you don't know what the client is/would be then web services are way to go. [quoted text, click to view] > Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the > database directly through the lan network? Yep, this is the easiest approach. [quoted text, click to view] > Or maybe nothing I just wrote... > > Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to > approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. > How to do it will come later. > > I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. > > Thank you in advance and happy 2007! :-) -- Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
[quoted text, click to view] "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message news:uJGQanoKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >> database directly through the lan network? >> > You are living in 2006 not in 1975 Almost 2007, Cor. -- Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
@Cor
If you think that being MVP means you can consider yourself to be better than someone else who is trying to learn, I'm sorry for you pal, because there is so much you still have to learn about life... You've been a noob too, and probably luckyer than me when you got real answers to your questions and not just some useless sarcasm. But thank you anyway MASTER, because you've given me another opportunity to train myself in patience. @everyone else Any serious suggestion out there please? Regards Fabrizio [quoted text, click to view] "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message news:uJGQanoKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >> database directly through the lan network? >> > You are living in 2006 not in 1975 > > Cor >
Hi Miha,
yes, there are a few people working on it and it has to run in intranet. I'm not worried about complexity, since I have already written db applications and remoting applications too. I was just asking because I have never combined the 2 things and wanted to be sure about that being a good idea. My dubts came out for concurrecy problems, which I think I could handle better if I had some application running on the server. And also, since the final price is always important expecially for small companies I have to check if I can do it the easy way (fat client with direct connection) with sqlexpress. Thank you for your advices. Best regards, Fabrizio [quoted text, click to view] "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message news:3E8ECAD8-7801-4B4A-A078-CBB15D79D1E5@microsoft.com... > Hi Fabrizio, > > "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message > news:45939c3a$0$4259$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... >> Hello, >> >> maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. >> Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They >> just need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they >> need to access this database from some other computers, with client >> applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. >> What is the best approach I can follow to do this? > > Depends on the requirements (security, scalability, etc.). Since there > aren't many users and, I presume application runs on intranet, I would go > with 2-tiers (fat client connects directly to the database) as it is > easiest to build. > >> I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the >> server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the >> other computers, deals with the first one. > > This is a better but more complicated/complex approach. > >> In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? >> Web service? Windows service? Something else? > > If client is always a .net then you should definitely go with remoting. If > you don't know what the client is/would be then web services are way to > go. > >> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >> database directly through the lan network? > > Yep, this is the easiest approach. > >> Or maybe nothing I just wrote... >> >> Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to >> approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. >> How to do it will come later. >> >> I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. >> >> Thank you in advance and happy 2007! > > :-) > -- > Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] > RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com > Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
[quoted text, click to view] "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message news:4593d97d$0$19106$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... > Hi Miha, > > yes, there are a few people working on it and it has to run in intranet. > I'm not worried about complexity, since I have already written db > applications and remoting applications too. > I was just asking because I have never combined the 2 things and wanted to > be sure about that being a good idea. It is certainly better than doing direct database access. Yet, it is more complex. Perhaps you might even consider using a ORM (LLBLGenPro recommended). [quoted text, click to view] > My dubts came out for concurrecy problems, which I think I could handle > better if I had some application running on the server. Define better :-) How do you handle concurrency? Simplest way would be to store modified data in a transaction and if it fails, it fails. User should reload data and modify it again. While it can be problematic (for user to modify data again) it is quite doable since usually there aren't many concurrency clashes. Again, it depends on application. [quoted text, click to view] > And also, since the final price is always important expecially for small > companies I have to check if I can do it the easy way (fat client with > direct connection) with sqlexpress. Also consider using an ORM (see above). It will do much of the database-related work for you. [quoted text, click to view] > > Thank you for your advices. You're welcome. -- Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
Well, to handle concurrency there are different ways.
I was thinking about storing in a table the timestamp of last read/write access and when a user submits his modifications I'm going to ask for confirmation in case someone has retrieved that data after him. But this will depend on requirement I haven't been given yet. I'll take a look at that ORM you suggest, honestly I don't know what it is. Thanks again, Fabrizio [quoted text, click to view] "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message news:%23I78WMpKHHA.4384@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > > "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message > news:4593d97d$0$19106$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... >> Hi Miha, >> >> yes, there are a few people working on it and it has to run in intranet. >> I'm not worried about complexity, since I have already written db >> applications and remoting applications too. >> I was just asking because I have never combined the 2 things and wanted >> to be sure about that being a good idea. > > It is certainly better than doing direct database access. Yet, it is more > complex. Perhaps you might even consider using a ORM (LLBLGenPro > recommended). > >> My dubts came out for concurrecy problems, which I think I could handle >> better if I had some application running on the server. > > Define better :-) > How do you handle concurrency? Simplest way would be to store modified > data in a transaction and if it fails, it fails. User should reload data > and modify it again. While it can be problematic (for user to modify data > again) it is quite doable since usually there aren't many concurrency > clashes. Again, it depends on application. > >> And also, since the final price is always important expecially for small >> companies I have to check if I can do it the easy way (fat client with >> direct connection) with sqlexpress. > > Also consider using an ORM (see above). It will do much of the > database-related work for you. > >> >> Thank you for your advices. > > You're welcome. > -- > Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] > RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com > Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
Can you explain why this answer, because for throwing mud you don't have the
need for much expirience in live as you show. Everybody else has given you the same answer as me, I only have used less words. Cor "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> schreef in bericht news:4593d68b$0$19094$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... [quoted text, click to view] > @Cor > If you think that being MVP means you can consider yourself to be better > than someone else who is trying to learn, I'm sorry for you pal, because > there is so much you still have to learn about life... > You've been a noob too, and probably luckyer than me when you got real > answers to your questions and not just some useless sarcasm. > But thank you anyway MASTER, because you've given me another opportunity > to train myself in patience. > > @everyone else > Any serious suggestion out there please? > > Regards > Fabrizio > > > "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message > news:uJGQanoKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >>> database directly through the lan network? >>> >> You are living in 2006 not in 1975 >> >> Cor >> > >
[quoted text, click to view] "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveThis@nwlink.com> wrote in message news:uVtv1FrKHHA.4848@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Timestamp concurrency is easy and relatively foolproof. Now that the > CommandBuilder recognizes it, Visual Studio can help build the code as > well. I expect ORM is overkill for this project. Stick with simple > approaches. I would use ORM. It creates much of the required sql code for you + (big plus) it behaves very well when database structure changes by strong typing. For example, if you change a field name in a table (or whatever) you won't notice (sql approach) until you run the application. And what's worse, you would have to check all sql statements when this happen. And it will happen. OTOH a good ORM would recreate all the code for you and yell error at compile time. Overkill? I don't think so. I guess we disagree :-) -- Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
He was asking which method is more suitable and I responded with pros and
cons of methods he mentioned. Bill was also helpfull. But I really don't see how your answer fits in this scenario... -- Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ [quoted text, click to view] "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message
news:OixtBesKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Can you explain why this answer, because for throwing mud you don't have > the need for much expirience in live as you show. > > Everybody else has given you the same answer as me, I only have used less > words. > > Cor > > > > "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> schreef in bericht > news:4593d68b$0$19094$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... >> @Cor >> If you think that being MVP means you can consider yourself to be better >> than someone else who is trying to learn, I'm sorry for you pal, because >> there is so much you still have to learn about life... >> You've been a noob too, and probably luckyer than me when you got real >> answers to your questions and not just some useless sarcasm. >> But thank you anyway MASTER, because you've given me another opportunity >> to train myself in patience. >> >> @everyone else >> Any serious suggestion out there please? >> >> Regards >> Fabrizio >> >> >> "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message >> news:uJGQanoKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >>>> database directly through the lan network? >>>> >>> You are living in 2006 not in 1975 >>> >>> Cor >>> >> >> > >
Miha,
As last the OP wrote. Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the database directly through the lan network? That was what he would do in my idea, all other scenario's are an overkill for 5 pc's in a Lan. In 1975 I would not have done that, because the database servers did me than nog give the possibilities as now. I had not the idea that Bill or you were advicing something else? Cor "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> schreef in bericht news:81F77FE1-9E92-4287-9FFD-1AADB160924F@microsoft.com... [quoted text, click to view] > He was asking which method is more suitable and I responded with pros and > cons of methods he mentioned. Bill was also helpfull. > But I really don't see how your answer fits in this scenario... > > -- > Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] > RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com > Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ > > > "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message > news:OixtBesKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Can you explain why this answer, because for throwing mud you don't have >> the need for much expirience in live as you show. >> >> Everybody else has given you the same answer as me, I only have used less >> words. >> >> Cor >> >> >> >> "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> schreef in bericht >> news:4593d68b$0$19094$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... >>> @Cor >>> If you think that being MVP means you can consider yourself to be better >>> than someone else who is trying to learn, I'm sorry for you pal, because >>> there is so much you still have to learn about life... >>> You've been a noob too, and probably luckyer than me when you got real >>> answers to your questions and not just some useless sarcasm. >>> But thank you anyway MASTER, because you've given me another opportunity >>> to train myself in patience. >>> >>> @everyone else >>> Any serious suggestion out there please? >>> >>> Regards >>> Fabrizio >>> >>> >>> "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message >>> news:uJGQanoKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >>>>> database directly through the lan network? >>>>> >>>> You are living in 2006 not in 1975 >>>> >>>> Cor >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >
Bill,
I have never had any problem to recognise concurrency errors using the commandbuilder can you tell me what the problems are? Cor "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveThis@nwlink.com> schreef in bericht news:uVtv1FrKHHA.4848@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... [quoted text, click to view] > Timestamp concurrency is easy and relatively foolproof. Now that the > CommandBuilder recognizes it, Visual Studio can help build the code as > well. I expect ORM is overkill for this project. Stick with simple > approaches. > > -- > ____________________________________ > 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) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message > news:4593e857$0$4247$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... >> Well, to handle concurrency there are different ways. >> I was thinking about storing in a table the timestamp of last read/write >> access and when a user submits his modifications I'm going to ask for >> confirmation in case someone has retrieved that data after him. >> But this will depend on requirement I haven't been given yet. >> I'll take a look at that ORM you suggest, honestly I don't know what it >> is. >> >> Thanks again, >> Fabrizio >> >> "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message >> news:%23I78WMpKHHA.4384@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message >>> news:4593d97d$0$19106$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... >>>> Hi Miha, >>>> >>>> yes, there are a few people working on it and it has to run in >>>> intranet. >>>> I'm not worried about complexity, since I have already written db >>>> applications and remoting applications too. >>>> I was just asking because I have never combined the 2 things and wanted >>>> to be sure about that being a good idea. >>> >>> It is certainly better than doing direct database access. Yet, it is >>> more complex. Perhaps you might even consider using a ORM (LLBLGenPro >>> recommended). >>> >>>> My dubts came out for concurrecy problems, which I think I could handle >>>> better if I had some application running on the server. >>> >>> Define better :-) >>> How do you handle concurrency? Simplest way would be to store modified >>> data in a transaction and if it fails, it fails. User should reload data >>> and modify it again. While it can be problematic (for user to modify >>> data again) it is quite doable since usually there aren't many >>> concurrency clashes. Again, it depends on application. >>> >>>> And also, since the final price is always important expecially for >>>> small companies I have to check if I can do it the easy way (fat client >>>> with direct connection) with sqlexpress. >>> >>> Also consider using an ORM (see above). It will do much of the >>> database-related work for you. >>> >>>> >>>> Thank you for your advices. >>> >>> You're welcome. >>> -- >>> Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] >>> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com >>> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ >> >> > >
SQL Server Express is a SQL Server instance... ;)
-- ____________________________________ 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] "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message news:4594fded$0$22381$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it... > Thank you. > I'm not using the express version of VS, I have the professional version, > but I personally don't have a SQL2005 instance on my pc, since it costs a > lot and SQL express is quite enough for me. > I also have the SQL Management studio express on my pc. > > I'll see what to do, now I have a clearer idea of what I need. > > Regards, > sfabriz > > "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveThis@nwlink.com> wrote in message > news:%234H7uErKHHA.4928@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Fabrizio, >> Your requirements are the same as many, many others and can be solved >> fairly simply and cheaply. Since you have so few users you can get away >> with using SQL Server Express edition (the free version) on the server. >> You don't need a server-side application (like a Web Service) or an >> ASP.NET approach. Create a Windows Forms application to connect to the >> SQL Server (which must be configured to work on the LAN (Intranet) as >> it's default configuration makes it invisible to the LAN. My book should >> help quite a bit with this approach as it discusses virtually every >> aspect of the system. Be sure to buy Visual Studio Professional or better >> as the tools in the Express version are really not sufficient to help. >> You'll also want to get the SQL Server Management Studio Express toolkit >> (free) download. Good luck. >> >> 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) >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message >> news:45939c3a$0$4259$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... >>> Hello, >>> >>> maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. >>> Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They >>> just need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they >>> need to access this database from some other computers, with client >>> applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. >>> What is the best approach I can follow to do this? >>> I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the >>> server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the >>> other computers, deals with the first one. >>> In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? >>> Web service? Windows service? Something else? >>> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >>> database directly through the lan network? >>> Or maybe nothing I just wrote... >>> >>> Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to >>> approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. >>> How to do it will come later. >>> >>> I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. >>> >>> Thank you in advance and happy 2007! >>> >>> Fabrizio >>> >> >> > >
Thank you.
I'm not using the express version of VS, I have the professional version, but I personally don't have a SQL2005 instance on my pc, since it costs a lot and SQL express is quite enough for me. I also have the SQL Management studio express on my pc. I'll see what to do, now I have a clearer idea of what I need. Regards, sfabriz [quoted text, click to view] "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveThis@nwlink.com> wrote in message news:%234H7uErKHHA.4928@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Fabrizio, > Your requirements are the same as many, many others and can be solved > fairly simply and cheaply. Since you have so few users you can get away > with using SQL Server Express edition (the free version) on the server. > You don't need a server-side application (like a Web Service) or an > ASP.NET approach. Create a Windows Forms application to connect to the SQL > Server (which must be configured to work on the LAN (Intranet) as it's > default configuration makes it invisible to the LAN. My book should help > quite a bit with this approach as it discusses virtually every aspect of > the system. Be sure to buy Visual Studio Professional or better as the > tools in the Express version are really not sufficient to help. You'll > also want to get the SQL Server Management Studio Express toolkit (free) > download. Good luck. > > 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) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message > news:45939c3a$0$4259$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... >> Hello, >> >> maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. >> Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They >> just need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they >> need to access this database from some other computers, with client >> applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. >> What is the best approach I can follow to do this? >> I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the >> server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the >> other computers, deals with the first one. >> In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? >> Web service? Windows service? Something else? >> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >> database directly through the lan network? >> Or maybe nothing I just wrote... >> >> Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to >> approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. >> How to do it will come later. >> >> I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. >> >> Thank you in advance and happy 2007! >> >> Fabrizio >> > >
Yes I can explain.
It's very hard to believe that yours is a serious answer. You claim you were serious and this is all a big misunderstanding... ok I want to believe that. Let me tell you a couple of things though. Given "You are living in 2006 not in 1975" you could understand either "we can do it now, since modern technology lets you do that" or "please be serious, that stuff is something we don't do since 1975", hence one thing and its opposite. To my remote-db-noob eyes that is something I don't understand, even if I wanted to see a good intention in your comment. The problem is that maybe you took for granted that I would have understood what you were saying, but unfortunately I didn't. And I think that there maybe be very few people who could. Your answer made me feel very very small anyway and as the Dalai Lama says: "consider your enemy as a supreme MASTER, because he will give you the rare opportunity to train yourself in patience.". Hence I said thank you. Of course I was ironic writing Master to you, but I really really thougth you were just sarcastic with me with no reason. Concluding, please don't be upset with me because it would be bad for you. I wish you to spend a wonderful new year's eve. regards, fabrizio [quoted text, click to view] "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message news:OixtBesKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Can you explain why this answer, because for throwing mud you don't have > the need for much expirience in live as you show. > > Everybody else has given you the same answer as me, I only have used less > words. > > Cor > > > > "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> schreef in bericht > news:4593d68b$0$19094$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... >> @Cor >> If you think that being MVP means you can consider yourself to be better >> than someone else who is trying to learn, I'm sorry for you pal, because >> there is so much you still have to learn about life... >> You've been a noob too, and probably luckyer than me when you got real >> answers to your questions and not just some useless sarcasm. >> But thank you anyway MASTER, because you've given me another opportunity >> to train myself in patience. >> >> @everyone else >> Any serious suggestion out there please? >> >> Regards >> Fabrizio >> >> >> "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message >> news:uJGQanoKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >>>> database directly through the lan network? >>>> >>> You are living in 2006 not in 1975 >>> >>> Cor >>> >> >> > >
Fabrizio,
I understood after your first answer that it could be misunderstand. But why, that is not the way we threath each other in these Internatinal Net newsgroups, we try to help. It can be opposite but than at the end of a discussion. This is what I did: you were asking [quoted text, click to view] >>Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to >>approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. You had given your own correct answer and I copied that. [quoted text, click to view] > Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the The word "just" in the sentence, made that I made my answer for the rest as > database directly through the lan network? > it was. I could have written as well, take the most easiest method. They are all correct but I prefer the one I show now, the other ones have for me a smell to old not needed methods anymore. Happy new year, Were are you living in Italy? Cor "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> schreef in bericht news:45953d43$0$22388$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it... [quoted text, click to view] > Yes I can explain. > It's very hard to believe that yours is a serious answer. > You claim you were serious and this is all a big misunderstanding... ok I > want to believe that. > Let me tell you a couple of things though. > Given "You are living in 2006 not in 1975" you could understand either "we > can do it now, since modern technology lets you do that" or "please be > serious, that stuff is something we don't do since 1975", hence one thing > and its opposite. > To my remote-db-noob eyes that is something I don't understand, even if I > wanted to see a good intention in your comment. > The problem is that maybe you took for granted that I would have > understood what you were saying, but unfortunately I didn't. And I think > that there maybe be very few people who could. > > Your answer made me feel very very small anyway and as the Dalai Lama > says: "consider your enemy as a supreme MASTER, because he will give you > the rare opportunity to train yourself in patience.". Hence I said thank > you. Of course I was ironic writing Master to you, but I really really > thougth you were just sarcastic with me with no reason. > > Concluding, please don't be upset with me because it would be bad for you. > I wish you to spend a wonderful new year's eve. > > regards, > fabrizio > > > "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message > news:OixtBesKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Can you explain why this answer, because for throwing mud you don't have >> the need for much expirience in live as you show. >> >> Everybody else has given you the same answer as me, I only have used less >> words. >> >> Cor >> >> >> >> "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> schreef in bericht >> news:4593d68b$0$19094$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it... >>> @Cor >>> If you think that being MVP means you can consider yourself to be better >>> than someone else who is trying to learn, I'm sorry for you pal, because >>> there is so much you still have to learn about life... >>> You've been a noob too, and probably luckyer than me when you got real >>> answers to your questions and not just some useless sarcasm. >>> But thank you anyway MASTER, because you've given me another opportunity >>> to train myself in patience. >>> >>> @everyone else >>> Any serious suggestion out there please? >>> >>> Regards >>> Fabrizio >>> >>> >>> "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message >>> news:uJGQanoKHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >>>>> database directly through the lan network? >>>>> >>>> You are living in 2006 not in 1975 >>>> >>>> Cor >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
Hi, Fabrizio:
You may use our SocketPro at www.udaparts.com. Inside the package, there are many database samples and tutorials to show you how to securely access ANY remote database ANYWHERE with ANY types of networks (LAN, Wireless, Modems, Dialup). See the article at http://www.udaparts.com/document/articles/dialupdb.htm With help of SocketPro, you can write a professional application in a few days with decent performance for all of types of networks. Regards, [quoted text, click to view] "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message news:45939c3a$0$4259$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... > Hello, > > maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. > Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They just > need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they need > to access this database from some other computers, with client > applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. > What is the best approach I can follow to do this? > I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the > server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the > other computers, deals with the first one. > In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? Web > service? Windows service? Something else? > Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the > database directly through the lan network? > Or maybe nothing I just wrote... > > Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to > approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. > How to do it will come later. > > I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. > > Thank you in advance and happy 2007! > > Fabrizio >
[quoted text, click to view]
>"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote: >Were are you living in Italy? Answered via mail. Cheers, Fabrizio
Thank you, I'll have a look at it.
Regards, Fabrizio [quoted text, click to view] "msgroup" <notemail@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:OhwhloHLHHA.1280@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Hi, Fabrizio: > > You may use our SocketPro at www.udaparts.com. Inside the package, > there are many database samples and tutorials to show you how to securely > access ANY remote database ANYWHERE with ANY types of networks (LAN, > Wireless, Modems, Dialup). > > See the article at > http://www.udaparts.com/document/articles/dialupdb.htm > > With help of SocketPro, you can write a professional application in a > few days with decent performance for all of types of networks. > > Regards, > > > "Fabrizio Romano" <fabriz75@tin.it> wrote in message > news:45939c3a$0$4259$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it... >> Hello, >> >> maybe I'm OT, but I don't know where else I can put this question. >> Say you have to write a program for a very small company (5 pc). They >> just need to store some data in a database which is on a server and they >> need to access this database from some other computers, with client >> applications. All these pc are connected in a lan. >> What is the best approach I can follow to do this? >> I thought about writing 2 applications: the first to be installed on the >> server, will deal with the database, and the second, installed on the >> other computers, deals with the first one. >> In case this is the right way, what technology should I use? Remoting? >> Web service? Windows service? Something else? >> Or maybe just forget about the server application and connect to the >> database directly through the lan network? >> Or maybe nothing I just wrote... >> >> Can anyone help me? I just need a guideline, in order to be able to >> approach the problem knowing at least what I have to do. >> How to do it will come later. >> >> I program in C#2.0 with VS05 and SQLEXPRESS. >> >> Thank you in advance and happy 2007! >> >> Fabrizio >> > >
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
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
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |