Develop Reference

Saving user information in wpf c# app

I am creating a c# wpf application that will store users information and allow users to view other users profiles in a corporation.
What would be the best way to store the data that each user is entering in order to have it accessible from a centralized location?
I'm fairly new to creating connections to databases in wpf applications and any push in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.
I've been reading a bit about SQLlite and it seems like it has its pros due to its mobile characteristics but does this mean that the SQLlite database will be local to each user? I need it to be centralized so that data entered from anywhere goes into one database.
Thank you

You could use ADO.net datasets to get the data from the server but this is done by downloading a local datatable and syncing it using a data adapter
connection between client and server
how to do in visual studio

As you stated mobile characteristics are not what you need. As for a central database consider the free SQL Express from Microsoft. You will need some type of security so they can only update their own profile.

Probably one of the more straightforward options is to create an Entity Framework model for your application. This may serve as a primer for your exploration of the topic:
Databinding with WPF
You'll probably find it easiest to develop against your local SQLExpress instance or some other local data store. But the final solution will need to be connected to an enterprise-ready database. Since there was no mention of cost constraints and the nature of this question is more of "how?" versus "what to use?", I see no reason why this shouldn't be a SQL Server solution.
Ultimately, though, this question is rather broad in scope and cannot be adequately addressed in a simple answer here.

Apply changes to Database later/manually

Is it possible to achieve this?
Download/fetch data from the database then save locally to a Windows Mobile app for later use (without internet connection).
Make changes to the database locally.
Upload the changes of the local database to update the database from the server manually.
I am thinking about a sync function but I am using an Oracle Database on the server and Oracle DB and SQL Server Compact doesn't support syncing with each other naturally.

Sure this is completely possible, but you are going to need to write the syncing feature yourself unfortunately. You might be able to incorporate this, but as of now there is no bolt-on solution for you, so you would need to add the syncing features.
Happy coding!

Please read about the ADO.NET technology.
It was made for implementation of your scenario - maintaining of disconnected cache of server data.
For example look at this article
And here is more specific example -> Disconnected Architecture in ADO.NET

Here's a great walkthrough from Microsoft on doing exactly this:
Walkthrough: Creating an Occasionally Connected Smart Device Application
Note that it was reported that this technique is not 100% reliable, meaning it can "forget" to post the latest data.
To get around this, you can add a TimeStamp DateTime field to each table that stores the time the latest data was written or updated, then modify your queries to only pull/push the latest records.

Database Deployment Practices

I have deployed plenty of software to my clients. Mostly are Window Forms applications.
Here is my current practice.
Manually install SQLExpress and SQL Management Studio to each client PC.
Then use ClickOne to install the code from the server.
When there is a changes in code, I will use ClickOne to deploy -(NO PROBLEM with this step)
But when there is a change in a database column, what do I do?
I have even tried writing a database update script. Each time the program starts, it will read through the .sql update file and run them if the database exists. This solves the problem of updating the database columns, but it does not help in my DEBUGGING work when my customer complain there is a wrong data. At that point, I have to personally go to their site to check it out.
I find it difficult to have the database installed on the client PC as it make my debugging work very very difficult. I am thinking about moving my client database to a host on an Online server. But that then comes with these constraints:
What if the internet is down?
What if my customer has no internet?
Could you help to advise me? Is this a common problem faced by developer? What is the common practice out there? Does Window Azure or SQL CE help?

Depending on the data I would recommend using SQL CE.
If the data isn't too much, speed is not the primary goal (CE is slower than Express) and you don't need DB-Features not supported by CE (e.g. stored procedures) it is the better choice IMHO, because:
The client does not need to install a full SQL server (easier installation/deployment)
You do not have problems with multiple SQLExpress instances
Your SW doesn't need to worry if there even is a SQL instance
Less resources used on the client side
Additionally the clients could send you their SQL CE DB-File for inspection and you do not need to go to their site.
It is also relativly easy to implement an off site sync with SQL CE and MS Sync FW.

Installing one database per client PC can be tricky. I think you have a decent handle on how to deal with the issue currently. It seems like the real issue you are currently facing is debugging. To deal with this, there are a couple ways you could go:
Have the customer upload their copy of the database back to you. This would provide you with the data they have and you could use it with a debug copy of your code to identify the issues. The downside is that if the database is large it might be an issue transferring it.
Remote onto the customer's machine. Observe the system remotely using something like CoPilot. That way you could see what is happening in its natural environment.
There are probably other ways, but these are a couple of good ones. As for using an online database, this is an option but it brings its own set of issues with it. You mentioned a couple. As for Azure, that is cloud-based (online) so the same issues will apply. SQL CE won't help you any more than your current installation does.
Bottom line is that I would recommend you look into the ways to fix your one issue (as listed above) instead of creating a whole new set of issues by moving to an Internet-based solution. I would only recommend moving to the Internet if it was addressing a larger business need (for example, mobility). Doing the same thing you have been doing only online will probably just make life harder.
To recap the comments below since they are so pertinent to the issue, if you are choosing between file-based databases that don't need to be physically installed on the machine, your best choices are probably between SQLite and SQL CE. Microsoft supports SQL CE better but it is a larger package and has less features than the trim SQLite. Here is a good discussion on the differences:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2278104/sql-ce-sqlite-what-are-the-differences-between-them
However, the issue gets more complicated when you start looking at linq2sql since that is designed for SQL server. Microsoft does not support SQL CE with linq2sql out of the box, although there is a work-around that will get it to work:
http://pietschsoft.com/post/2009/01/Using-LINQ-to-SQL-with-SQL-Server-Compact-Edition.aspx
SQLite is not supported at all with linq2sql but there is a way to use linq to talk with SQLite:
LINQ with SQLite (linqtosql)
This library also supports other common databases including MySQL and Firebird.

You could use the SQLCMD utility to execute the change script, as mentioned in this related question

.NET Data Storage - Database vs single file

I have a C# application that allows one user to enter information about customers and job sites. The information is very basic.
Customer: Name, number, address, email, associated job site.
Job Site: Name, location.
Here are my specs I need for this program.
No limit on amount of data entered.
Single user per application. No concurrent activity or multiple users.
Allow user entries/data to be exported to an external file that can be easily shared between applications/users.
Allows for user queries to display customers based on different combinations of customer information/job site information.
The data will never be viewed or manipulated outside of the application.
The program will be running almost always, minimized to the task bar.
Startup time is not very important, however I would like the queries to be considerably fast.
This all seems to point me towards a database, but a very lightweight one. However I also need it to have no limitations as far as data storage. If you agree I should use a database, please let me know what would be best suited for my needs. If you don't think I should use a database, please make some other suggestions on what you think would be best.

My suggestion would be to use SQLite. You can find it here: http://sqlite.org/. And you can find the C# wrapper version here: http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com/
SQLite is very lightweight and has some pretty powerful stuff for such a lightweight engine. Another option you can look into is Microsoft Access.

You're asking the wrong question again :)
The better question is "how do I build an application that lets me change the data storage implementation?"
If you apply the repository pattern and properly interface it you can build interchangable persistence layers. So you could start with one implementation and change it as-needed wihtout needing to re-engineer the business or application layers.
Once you have a repository interface you could try implementations in a lot of differnt approaches:
Flat File - You could persist the data as XML, and provided that it's not a lot of data you could store the full contents in-memory (just read the file at startup, write the file at shutdown). With in-memory XML you can get very high throughput without concern for database indexes, etc.
Distributable DB - SQLite or SQL Compact work great; they offer many DB benefits, and require no installation
Local DB - SQL Express is a good middle-ground between a lightweight and full-featured DB. Access, when used carefully, can suffice. The main benefit is that it's included with MS Office (although not installed by default), and some IT groups are more comfortable having Access installed on machines than SQL Express.
Full DB - MySql, SQL Server, PostGreSQL, et al.
Given your specific requirements I would advise you towards an XML-based flat file--with the only condition being that you are OK with the memory-usage of the application directly correlating to the size of the file (since your data is text, even with the weight of XML, this would take a lot of entries to become very large).
Here's the pros/cons--listed by your requirements:
Cons
No limit on amount of data entered.
using in-memory XML would mean your application would not scale. It could easily handle a 10MB data-file, 100MB shouldn't be an issue (unless your system is low on RAM), above that you have to seriously question "can I afford this much memory?".
Pros
Single user per application. No concurrent activity or multiple users.
XML can be read into memory and held by the process (AppDomain, really). It's perfectly suited for single-user scenarios where concurrency is a very narrow concern.
Allow user entries/data to be exported to an external file that can be easily shared between applications/users.
XML is perfect for exporting, and also easy to import to Excel, databases, etc...
Allows for user queries to display customers based on different combinations of customer information/job site information.
Linq-to-XML is your friend :D
The data will never be viewed or manipulated outside of the application.
....then holding it entirely in-memory doesn't cause any issues
The program will be running almost always, minimized to the task bar.
so loading the XML at startup, and writing at shutdown will be acceptible (if the file is very large it could take a while)
Startup time is not very important, however I would like the queries to be considerably fast
Reading the XML would be relatively slow at startup; but when it's loaded in-memory it will be hard to beat. Any given DB will require that the DB engine be started, that interop/cross-process/cross-network calls be made, that the results be loaded from disk (if not cached by the engine), etc...

It sounds to me like a database is 100% what you need. It offers both the data storage, data retrieval (including queries) and the ability to export data to a standard format (either direct from the database, or through your application.)
For a light database, I suggest SQLite (pronounced 'SQL Lite' ;) ). You can google for tutorials on how to set it up, and then how to interface with it via your C# code. I also found a reference to this C# wrapper for SQLite, which may be able to do much of the work for you!

How about SQLite? It sounds like it is a good fit for your application.
You can use System.Data.SQLite as the .NET wrapper.

You can get SQL Server Express for free. I would say the question is not so much why should you use a database, more why shouldn't you? This type of problem is exactly what databases are for, and SQL Server is a very powerful and widely used database, so if you are going to go for some other solution you need to provide a good reason why you wouldn't go with a database.

A database would be a good fit. SQLite is good as others have mentioned.
You could also use a local instance of SQL Server Express to take advantage of improved integration with other pieces of the Microsoft development stack (since you mention C#).
A third option is a document database like Raven which may fit from the sounds of your data.
edit
A fourth option would be to try Lightswitch when the beta comes out in a few days. (8-23-2010)
/edit
There is always going to be a limitation on data storage (the empty space of the hard disk). According to wikipedia, SQL Express is limited to 10 GB for SQL Server Express 2008 R2

Best means to store data locally when offline

I am in the midst of writing a small program (more to experiment with vs 2010 than anything else)
Despite being an experiment it has some practical use for our local athletics club.
My thought was to access the DB (currently online) to download the current members and store locally on a laptop (this is a MS sql table, used to power the club's website).
Take the laptop to the event (yes there ARE places that don't have internet coverage), add members to that days race (also a row from a sql table (though no changes would be made to this), record results (new records in 3rd table)
Once home, showered and within internet access again, upload/edit the tables as per the race results/member changes etc.
So I was thinking I'd do something like write xml files locally with the data, including a field to indicate changes etc?
If anyone can point me in a direction I would appreciate it...hell if anyone could tell me if this has a name, I'd appreciate it.

Essentially what you need is, in addition to your remote data store, a local data store on your desktop. You could then write your code by hand to sync the data stores when you go offline / online, or you could use the Microsoft Sync framework to handle it for you.
I've personally used the Sync framework on a number of projects and once you get used to the conventions, it's pretty easy to use.

If a local storage format is what your after. SQLite is one option. You can copy your tables from the server to your local SQLite db.
You could also save your data to files, but XML is a horrible format for doing this. You'll probably want to use YAML or JSON instead.

You may want to take a look at SQL Server Compact -- it provides some decent capabilities with synchronizing back with the mothership SQL server.

If you're using MS SQL Server for production, and you only need to work offline on your personal computer, you could install MS SQL Server Express locally. The advantage here over using a different local datastore is that you can reuse your schema, stored procedures, etc. essentially only needing to change the connection string to your application (which you could run locally too through Visual Studio). You would have to write code to manually sync your online and offline db instances, but since it's a small application, it may be reasonable to just copy the entire database from production to local and then from local to production when you get home (assuming you're the only one updating the db, and wouldn't be potentially wiping out any new records entered in production while you were at the event).

Google Gears http://gears.google.com/ is intended if your app is a web app (which I didn't quite get what it is from your description)