I am writing a desktop utility application to manage a small set of data. This application will be used by a singular person so I'd like to keep the database as simple as possible. I am considering XML or SQL Server Compact 3.5 (SQL CE). I am leaning towards SQL CE because it will probably be easier/quicker to develop than XML. Are there any other worthwhile solutions worth considering? Is SQL CE the way to go?
Edit - Here are some more specifics on the data:
Maybe a half a dozen tables
No more than 5000 records
Mostly CRUD operations
Basic reporting/exporting to excel
SQLite would be my choice.
SQL Server Express
It depends on a number of parameters:
How much data will you store
Will you perform complex queries on the data
What kind of performance demands to you have
and more...
If you are going to store relatively small amounts of data, without complex relations, and without a great need to query the data in complex ways, XML might be enough. If you on the other hand expect a greater amount of data, need good query support and performance, SQL Server Express or some other lightweight database manager would be the way to go.
You can take a look at Firebird Embeeded.
link text
I've had good experiences with Sql CE, that seems like a very reasonable solution given the scenario you're describing. It has the added advantage of being much simpler to deploy than a separate solution as well, and I think that is a very big deal for a simple app like you describe.
I'm using it with Linq2Sql right now in my personal project, in fact. :)
SQL Server CE is lightweight and simple, and if you're using Visual Studio you already have it.
If this is for a single user and a limited set of data, I'd recommend looking into db4o. http://db4o.com
It's an object database that would allow you to store objects directly without having to translate them into tables.
Related
My WinForms C#/.NET application requires a table/grid control to display records to the end user. The records will be simple, containing only two fields, a string and a date/time field. I need to persist the data and I am wondering what the most efficient control and storage back-end is to use. The data is non-critical (i.e. - not health or financial records, or anything sensitive requiring extensive safety or any encryption).
One solution I have found so far is the DataGrid control in conjunction with SQL Server Compact Edition. I learned about this solution from this tutorial:
http://www.dotnetperls.com/datagridview-tutorial
It seems though that this may be overkill for my application. In addition, I am worried about the complexities of installing SQL Server CE, especially when it comes to admin vs. user account privilege issues during installation:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa983326(v=vs.80).aspx
Is there a table or grid control with built-in file load/save capabilities that uses a simple disk file as the storage method, perhaps a comma delimited ASCII file? I'd like something that I can still use SQL (via LINQ) to interface with. also, I am hoping that this can be done transparently. That is, if I want to upgrade to an SQL database engine solution later, the code from my end that interfaces with the data would not change (except perhaps for the database open/create code of course).
Or am I better off simply biting the bullet and going with SQL Server CE or perhaps SQLite:
Good embedded database solution (like SQLite) for .Net
If you have any caveats or anecdotes regarding installation issues and ease of use, they would be appreciated.
In my projects, we use Object datasources. Grid's can be bound to collections of objects just as easily as they can dataTables. You can store/restore the data using a simple serialization engine (XmlSerializer is rather easy to implement). Make a basic object, use List or BindingList as the dataset, and serialize/de-serialize it in the backEnd when you need it.
List and BindingList both support Linq queries.
Adding database save later is as simple as writing the code that saves the object to the database, in place of the serialization code, no change to the front end at all.
As far as a "Correct" solution is concerned...there are so many different ways to do it that it boils down to personal preference, and possibly actual requirements and expected future development. I find it easier to code using objects because the data manipulation is easier, but if you are going for straight record entry, no data manipulation required, going direct to a database is easier. It just depends on the data and what you plan on doing with it.
I strongly recommend you to use an embedded database, because it will be easier to go to a full database in a near future. SQL Server CE is a good option, and if you want to go big you can simply go to a full SQL Server Database with minimal changes in your code, the only downside of SQL Server CE is that you need to install it and it requires the .NET Framework 4, aside from that I don't see a big problem with it.
I'm currently developing app that requires storage of lots of information from different controls. I've never done this before, and after reading couple things on this topic got a little confused. Do I need to download SQL server 2008 and work with it in order to store data from WinForm? If yes, then what is the service-side item for? Can I use for storage?I don't need to import data from database(at least not for now), I just need stuff to save somewhere, and I would like to know where exactly. Thank you!
You can choose to store your data in a serverless database (SQL CE, SQLite for example) if you don't need fancy database stuff like stored procedures, weird indexes etc. Both of the above mentioned technologies are compatible with Entity Framework, hence you can use code first approach (you can write the classes and the database would be generated on the fly).
here you can read more about it.
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/318010/Entity-Framework-Code-First-Let-s-Try-It
And here's SQLite assembly for .Net
http://system.data.sqlite.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki
Good luck
You don't have to store anything in a database, you could for example serialize whatever you need to store into isolated storage
I have read one line from your question " SQL server 2008 and work with it in order to store data from WinForm"; Mean you want to save some data and that will be coming from data entry from winform.. RIght?
If that is the case you can adopt any of the RDBMS software that suites your finance + capacity needs and other perameters.
You can surely go for SQL server 2008 or Oracle or MySql or (List will go one).
What is the nature of your data?
Just because it's big does not necessarily mean a full-blown DBMS (or even an embedded database) is the best fit. Have you considered simply serializing the data to plain files?
But if your data is "relational" and you need to do the things such as querying, integrity enforcement, transactions, concurrent access by multiple clients (etc..), then you should definitely consider a database approach, including MS SQL Server, Oracle, IBM DB2, Sybase etc...
There are good open-source DBMSes as well: PostgreSQL, Firebird, MySQL...
All other applications I've written have been network/web apps where I've used an SQL database to store data and that has made sense to me.
If I'm creating an application that does not need to be networked ever, is there a standard way to store this data permanently? A text file is possible, but doesn't give me the benefits of querying an SQL server nor is it very secure. Is there something similar to an SQL server that I can initiate and save on starting up my program?
Perhaps there is some structure I've never come across?
From what I've read I might be able to do something as mentioned above like with SQLite. Does that make sense for large and distributed applications?
Thanks in advance for any clarifications on how to design these types of programs.
Edit: to clarify what #TomTom was saying, it is not a large amount of data like he is suggesting. I would be surprised if it ever got over several gigs of data. My point in saying large was that it seemed unreasonable to create some sort of a data structure that I could save into a text file, load up/search through to grab my data compared to using an SQL-like database.
Reading through the answers apparently SQLite or something similar is reasonable to use for desktop applications. I'll continue looking into it and probably use it to track data for my next project.
You can use an embedded database - this can be a SQL database, but does not have to be.
For windows, look at SQLite, SQL Server Compact and RavenDB (for a non SQL, document database).
You could still use SQL database, but locally. Try SQLite.
Other option to use Windows built-in database engine which name is Esent. Fast, but not really convenient to use its Api.
I am working on a personal project as a way of learning more about C# and .NET, specifically creating an application that utilises a database (MS SQL Server 2008 in my case). Whilst I appreciate there isn't always a definitive "right" way of doing things, given the choice between using an old technology/idea or a new one, I would rather use the new one. For example, one of my aims for this project is to learn, or at least familiarise myself with, WPF rather than using WinForms as I have done in the past.
On that basis, I've been muddling around without a great deal of direction with regards to saving data to my database and retrieving it. So far I've managed to get both those working using TableAdapters but I feel like they are the "old" way of working (my basis for this is that they are listed under Visual Studio 2005 on MSDN). Firstly, am I correct in this assumption? If so, what are the newer methods of saving and retrieving data from a database? I would be grateful of any pros and cons each method offers.
I've Googled and searched MSDN extensively but I don't feel like I am using the correct search terms as I have only succeeded in confusing myself.
I have .NET 3.5, Visual Studio 2008 and Microsoft SQL Server 2008 at my disposal.
Any guidance would be much appreciated.
I would agree that TableAdapters, DataSets, DataTables, etc. are the "old" way of doing things.
The "new" way would be Linq-to-SQL, Entity Framework or NHibernate.
Personally, I like to use a combination of Linq-to-SQL along with plain old DBConnections, DataReaders and DTO's where needed.
If you would like a newer way of doing Database access in .NET, I would recommend looking into LINQ to SQL or the Entity Framework.
There are many many many different ways to retrieve data from SQL Server 2008 using .Net.
Table Adapters are not a bad way; they are core to the .Net Framework, easy to get started with and reasonably powerful, although they do not perform quite as well as other options and often require more memory.
Basically Table adapters are good if your data is structured the way you want to view it. If you want to view data in a different way to it is stored you can do this with a table adapter but you loose the ability to write back changes to the database, this is OK if you are just generating a report.
If you want to view and change the data and the data is not in the structure you want to view it you need entity framework so you can query the data to get it into a different format and still have the ability to write any changes back. This is what the call the data from the server the MV to the display the VM
In a desktop application, I need to store a 'database' of patient names with simple information, which can later be searched through. I'd expect on average around 1,000 patients total. Each patient will have to be linked to test results as well, although these can/will be stored seperately from the patients themselves.
Is a database the best solution for this, or overkill? In general, we'll only be searching based on a patient's first/last name, or ID numbers. All data will be stored with the application, and not shared outside of it.
Any suggestions on the best method for keeping all such data organized? The method for storing the separate test data is what seems to stump me when not using databases, while keeping it linked to the patient.
Off the top of my head, given a List<Patient>, I can imagine several LINQ commands to make searching a breeze, although with a list of 1,000 - 10,000 patients, I'm unsure if there's any performance concerns.
Use a database. Mainly because what you expect and what you get (especially over the long term) tend be two totally different things.
This is completely unrelated to your question on a technical level, but are you doing this for a company in the United States? What kind of patient data are you storing?
Have you looked into HIPAA requirements and checked to see if you're a covered entity? Be sure that you're complying with all legal regulations and requirements!
I think 1000 is to much to try to store in XML. I'd go with a simple db type, like access or Sqlite. Yes, as a matter of fact, I'd probably use Sqlite. Sql Server Express is probably overkill for it. http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com/ is the .net provider.
I would recommend a database. You can use SQL Server Express for something like that. Trying to use XML or something similar would probably get out of hand with that many rows.
For smaller databases/apps like this I've yet to notice any performance hits from using LINQ to SQL or Entity Framework.
I would use SQL Server Express because it has the best tool support (IDE integration) from Microsoft. I don't see any reason to consider it overkill.
Here's an article on how to embed it directly in your application (no separate installation needed).
If you had read-only files provided by another party in some kind of standard format which were meant to be used by the application, then I would consider simply indexing them according to your use cases and running your searches and UI against that. But that's still some customized work.
Relational databases are great for storing data in tables, and for representing the relationships between tables. Typically there are also good tools for getting the data in and out.
There are other systems you could use to store your data, but none which would so quickly be mapped to your input (you didn't mention how your data would get into this system) and then be queryable against with least effort.
Now, which database to choose...
Use Database...but maybe just SQLite, instead of a fully fledged database like MS SQL (Express).