I am creating a website that will be used by an accounting dept. to track budget expenditures by different projects.
I am using SQL Server 2008 R2 for the database and ASP.net C# MVC 3 for the website.
What my boss has asked me to do is every time any user updates or creates a project, we need to log that change into a new table called Mapping_log. It should record the whole Mapping row being saved or created, and additionally the user and the datestamp. The notes field will now be mandatory, and the note should be saved to the Mapping_log.
Now when editing the PA, the Notes field will always be empty and below it, it should have a list of the older notes organized by date. I have been looking into maybe using Nlog and Log4net but I have not been able to find any good tutorials for a situation like mine. It seems that those modules are mostly used for error logging, which although important is not exactly what I am try to do at the moment.
I need some direction... does anyone have any advice or tutorials that I could use to learn how I can implement a process that will keep track of changes made to the data by users of the site.
Thanks for your help/advice!
You can consider two new features that SQL Server 2008 introduced: Change Tracking and Change Data Capture.
You could use that and avoid your custom Mapping_log table.
But if you need to apply a more complex -business- rule, perhaps it will better doing that in the application layer, rather than purely in the database.
Regards.
I would just create two triggers - one for the update, one for the insert.
These triggers would look something like this - assuming you also want to log the operation (insert vs. update) in your Mapping_Log table:
CREATE TRIGGER trg_Mapping_Insert
ON dbo.Mapping
AFTER INSERT
AS
INSERT INTO dbo.Mapping_Log(col1, col2, ..., colN, User, DateStamp, Operation)
SELECT
col1, col2, ..., colN, SUSER_NAME(), GETDATE(), 'INSERT'
FROM
Inserted
(your UPDATE trigger would be very similar - just replace "insert" by "update" wherever it appears)
This is done "behind the scenes" for you - once in place, you don't have to do anything anymore to have these operations "logged" to your Mapping_Log table.
Related
I have ERP database "A" has only read permission, where i cant create trigger on the table.
A is made for ERP system (Unknown Program for me ). I have another Database "B" that is private to my application this application work on both databases. i want to reflect A's changes(for any insert/Update/Delete) instantly to B.
Is there any Functionality in c# that can work exactly as trigger works in database???
You have few solutions, best one depends on which kind of database you have to support.
Generic solution, changes in A database aren't allowed
If you can't change master database and this must work with every kind of database then you have only one option: polling.
You shouldn't check too often (so forget to do it more or less instantly) to save network traffic and it's better to do in in different ways for insert/update/delete. What you can do depends on how database is structured, for example:
Insert: to catch an insert you may simply check for highest row ID (assuming what you need to monitor has an integer column used as key).
Update: for updates you may check a timestamp column (if it's present).
Delete: this may be more tricky to detect, a first check would be count number of rows, if it's changed and no insert occured then you detected a delete else just subtract the number of inserts.
Generic solution, changes in A database are allowed
If you can change the original database you can decrease network traffic (and complexity) using triggers on database side, when a trigger is fired just put a record in an internal log table (just few columns: one for the change type, one for affected table, one for affected record).
You will need to poll only on this table (using a simple query to check if number of rows increased). Because action (insert/update/delete) is stored in the table you just need to switch on that column to execute proper action.
This has a big disadvantage (in my point of view): it puts logic related to your application inside the master database. This may be terrible or not but it depends on many many factors.
SQL Server/Vendor specific
If you're application is tied to Microsoft SQL Server you can use SqlDependency class to track changes made. It works for SS only but I think there may be implementations for other databases. Disadvantage is that this will always bee specific to a specific vendor (so if A database will change host...you'll have to change your code too).
From MSDN:
SqlDependency was designed to be used in ASP.NET or middle-tier services where there is a relatively small number of servers having dependencies active against the database. It was not designed for use in client applications, where hundreds or thousands of client computers would have SqlDependency objects set up for a single database server.
Anyway if you're using SQL Server you have other options, just follow links in MSDN documentation.
Addendum: if you need a more fine control you may check TraceServer and Object:Altered (and friends) classes. This is even more tied to Microsoft SQL Server but it should be usable on a more wide context (and you may keep your applications unaware of these things).
You may find useful, depending on your DBMS:
Change Data Capture (MS SQL)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb522489%28v=SQL.100%29.aspx
Database Change Notification (Oracle)
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B19306_01/appdev.102/b14251/adfns_dcn.htm
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/issue-archive/2006/06-mar/o26odpnet-093584.html
Unfortunately, there's no SQL92 solution on data change notification
Yes There is excellent post are here please check this out..
http://devzone.advantagedatabase.com/dz/webhelp/advantage9.1/mergedprojects/devguide/part1point5/creating_triggers_in_c_with_visual_studio_net.htm
If this post solve your question then mark as answered..
Thanks
I am trying to use LINQ to create a new record in a predefined (in production) table where the ID isnt IDENTITY.
I've seen the previous answers about using SQL and transaction to solve this:
Best way to get the next id number without "identity"
My question is if there is a LINQ / C# version of this too as I would like to have a function in C# that I can place in code with the rest of the functions.
For the record, we are using old SQL-server 2000 so no native .NET support inside the server.
EDIT
I was hoping someone would show the actual C# / LINQ code for it. Something about SELECT TOP 1 [TABLE_ID] ORDER BY DESC and then adding 1 to the value in TABLE_ID... but perhaps its a question that is too hard?
The reason for using a SQL-side identity is that SQL can control any parallelism issues. If two users call you C# identity code at the same time, you might end up with two IDs the same.
To work around this, either go with SQL identity, or generate GUIDs instead of sequential IDs.
These are very standard and common things to do, and there's not a lot of point doing anything else, as you'll have to deal with concurrency pain that's already been solved.
Having said that, you can do the obvious:
INSERT INTO my_table (id, ...)
VALUES ((SELECT MAX(id)+1 FROM my_table), ...)
Or something similar IF AND ONLY IF you set the table/transaction locking VERY carefully.
I think the best idea is when you open the page on Page_Load create a new record/row in the table then you can show the created id as the item id then when is the user submits the form then update that record with the all info.
You can schedule a job to clear the empty data if for example the user open the new page but decided not to continue and don't submit the form based on whatever condition you want (you might use bit as a condition for submitted or not).
I'm starting a new project which will need to allow edits on forms but to keep track of the original and who did what edits and where (p.s. I wouldn't be able to use any extra software other than visual studio 2010 and Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio so no point suggesting any addition software, this is purely a code or table design minded question) .
I'm a perfectionist and I know some possible routes to achieve this will prob change my overall project design but I'm not sure if the ideas I have on how to implement this are best so I like to hear others opinions on below ideas and your own ideas on the quickest most effective way to implement above problem.
Ideas:-
I'd set it up so that when they edit it would display all existing ranges of data from textboxs to radiobuttons and even some drop downs and the value which they had and then on submit it would copy the original record via the Id into a achieve table, create the new record and then delete the original from the main table.
I figure some way to add X amount of comments to any section of the form and each would have a timestamp and username from win auth recorded at the bottom.
Edit - My intention was to get a variety of solutions but I suppose once I'm able to start on the editing section of this project if the single solution given works then I'll mark that correct.
I'm not sure whether this is what you are looking for but I have the need to log all changes to data (for audit reasons) and the way I have implemented this is to create a new 'History' table in SQL Server that will store the record ID, username of person who changed it, whether they added/modified/deleted something and when this happened etc.
In the code to add/edit/delete things in my database I always call ObjectContext.SaveChanges (I use Entity Framework 4) so what I have implemented is an extension to this method that uses various parts of the ObjectStateManager to get the information required about the entity that has changed and inserts the details into the History table. You then just need to query this table in the database to display details of what has changed.
Every change of data in some row in database should save the previous row data in some kind of history so user can rollback to previous row data state. Is there any good practice for that approach? Tried with DataContract and serializing and deserializing data objects but it becomes little messy with complex objects.
So to be more clear:
I am using NHibernate for data access and want to stay out off database dependency (For testing using SQL server 2005)
What is my intention is to provide data history so every time user can rollback to some previous versions.
An example of usage would be the following:
I have a news article
Somebody make some changes to that article
Main editor see that this news has some typos
It decides to rollback to previous valid version (until the newest version is corrected)
I hope I gave you valid info.
Tables that store changes when the main table changes are called audit tables. You can do this multiple ways:
In the database using triggers: I would recommend this approach because then there is no way that data can change without a record being made. You have to account for 3 types of changes when you do this: Add, Delete, Update. Therefore you need trigger functionality that will work on all three.
Also remember that a transaction can modify multiple records at the same time, so you should work with the full set of modified records, not just the last record (as most people belatedly realize they did).
Control will not be returned to the calling program until the trigger execution is completed. So you should keep the code as light and as fast as possible.
In the middle layer using code: This approach will let you save changes to a different database and possibly take some load off the database. However, a SQL programmer running an UPDATE statement will completely bypass your middle layer and you will not have an audit trail.
Structure of the Audit Table
You will have the following columns:
Autonumber PK, TimeStamp, ActionType + All columns from your original table
and I have done this in the following ways in the past:
Table Structure:
Autonumber PK, TimeStamp, ActionType, TableName, OriginalTableStructureColumns
This structure will mean that you create one audit table per data table saved. The data save and reconstruction is fairly easy to do. I would recommend this approach.
Name Value Pair:
Autonumber PK, TimeStamp, ActionType, TableName, PKColumns, ColumnName, OldValue, NewValue
This structure will let you save any table, but you will have to create name value pairs for each column in your trigger. This is very generic, but expensive. You will also need to write some views to recreate the actual rows by unpivoting the data. This gets to be tedious and is not generally the method followed.
Microsoft have introduced new auditing capabilities into SQL Server 2008. Here's an article describing some of the capabilities and design goals which might help in whichever approach you choose.
MSDN - Auditing in SQL Server 2008
You can use triggers for that.
Here is one example.
AutoAudit is a SQL Server (2005, 2008)
Code-Gen utility that creates Audit
Trail Triggers with:
* Created, Modified, and RowVerwsion (incrementing INT) columns to table
* view to reconstruct deleted rows
* UDF to reconstruct Row History
* Schema Audit Trigger to track schema changes
* Re-code-gens triggers when Alter Table changes the table
http://autoaudit.codeplex.com/
Saving serialized data always gets messy in the end, you're right to stay away from that. The best thing to do is to create a parallel "version" table with the same columns as your main table.
For instance, if you have a table named "book", with columns "id", "name", "author", you could add a table named "book_version" with columns "id", "name", "author", "version_date", "version_user"
Each time you insert or update a record on table "book", your application will also insert into "book_version".
Depending on your database system and the way you database access from your application, you may be able to completely automate this (cfr the Versionable plugin in Doctrine)
One way is to use a DB which supports this natively, like HBase. I wouldn't normally suggest "Change your DB server to get this one feature," but since you don't specify a DB server in your question I'm presuming you mean this as open-ended, and native support in the server is one of the best implementations of this feature.
What database system are you using? If you're using an ACID (atomicity, consistency, isolation, durability) compliant database, can't you just use the inbuilt rollback facility to go back to a previous transaction?
I solved this problem very nice by using NHibernate.Enverse
For those intersted read this:
http://nhforge.org/blogs/nhibernate/archive/2010/07/05/nhibernate-auditing-v3-poor-man-s-envers.aspx
We have built an application which needs a local copy of a table from another database. I would like to write an ado.net routine which will keep the local table in sync with the master. Using .net 2.0, C# and ADO.NET.
Please note I really have no control over the master table which is in a third party, mission critical app I don't wish to mess with.
For example Here is the master data table:
ProjectCodeId Varchar(20) [PK]
ProjectCode Varchar(20)
ProjectDescrip Varchar(50)
OtherUneededField int
OtherUneededField2 int
The local table we need to keep in sync...
ProjectCodeId Varchar(20) [PK]
ProjectCode Varchar(20)
ProjectDescrip Varchar(50)
Perhaps a better approach to this question is what have you done in the past to this type of problem? What has worked best for you or should be avoided at all costs?
My goal with this question is to determine a good way to handle this. So often I am combining data from two or more disjointed data sources. I haven't included database platforms for this reason, it really shouldn't matter. In this current situation both databases are MSSQL, but I prefer the solution not use linked databases or DTS, etc.
Sure, truncating the local table and refilling it each time from the master is an option, but with thousands of rows I don't think this is very efficient. Do you?
EDIT: First, recognize that what you are doing is hand-rolled replication and replication is never simple.
You need to track and apply all of the CRUD state changes. That said, ADO.NET can do this.
To track changes to the source you can use Query Notification with your source database. This requires special permission against the database so the owner of the source database will need to take action to enable this solution. I haven't used this technique myself, but here is a description of it.
See "Query Notifications in SQL Server (ADO.NET)"
Query notifications were introduced in
Microsoft SQL Server 2005 and the
System.Data.SqlClient namespace in
ADO.NET 2.0. Built upon the Service
Broker infrastructure, query
notifications allow applications to be
notified when data has changed. This
feature is particularly useful for
applications that provide a cache of
information from a database, such as a
Web application, and need to be
notified when the source data is
changed.
To apply changes from the source db table you need to retrieve the data from the target db table, apply the changes to the target rows and post the changes back to the target db.
To apply the changes you can either
1) Delete and reinsert all of the rows (simple), or
2) Merge row-by-row changes (hard).
Delete and reinsert is self explanatory, so I won't go into detail on that.
For row-by-row change tracking here is an approach. (I am assuming here that Query Notification doesn't give you row-by-row change information, so you have to calculate it.)
You need to determine which rows were modified and identify inserted and deleted rows. Create a DataView with a sort for each table to get a Find method you can use to lookup matching rows by ID.
Identify modified rows by using a datetime/timestamp column, or by comparing all field values. Copy modified values to the target row.
Identify added and deleted rows by looping over the respective table DataViews and using the Find method of the other DataView to identify rows that do not appear in the first table. Insert or delete rows from the target table as required. (The Delete method doesn't remove the row but marks it for deletion by the TableAdapter Update.)
Good luck!
+tom
I would push in the direction where the application that is inserting the data would insert into one db/table then the other in the same function. Make the application do the work, the db will be pushed already.
Some questions - what db platform? how are you using the data?
I'm going to assume you're just using this data as a lookup... and as you have no timestamp and no ability modify the existing table, i'd just blow away the local copy periodically and pull it down from the master table again.
Unless you've got a hell of a lot of data the overhead for this should be pretty small.
If you need to synch back to the master table, you'll need to do something a bit more exotic.
Can you use SQL replication? This would be preferable to writing code to do it no?