KenpoMatt
Active member
Were Oracle all the way, here. We have migrated away from ODBCs. Who knows, maybe well get some SQLServer going on soon.
Database with .NET
- Thread starter Madz
- Start date
kleptos
Well-known member
I tried to understand Oracle, but coming from MSSQL and Enterprise Manager, i couldnt grasp the technique to run and use Oracle. So i stayed with MSSQL. I anxiously await Microsofts newest version of MSSQL.
kleptos
Well-known member
I use stored procedures all the time. They are great, between stored procedures and functions, i can do almost anything in MSSQL.
techmanbd
Well-known member
I use MS ACCESS. I have used SQL Server 7 and Oracle 8.1, but the company i work for now only has ACCESS. They are not big on data here, but i plan on trying to change that. hehe
techmanbd
Well-known member
KenpoMatt, I would stay with oracle since you already have it. and as much money as your company probably paid for it, i doubt they would want to get SQL SERVER. Plus i believe Oracle is a stronger database.
dpifer
Member
Ive been using Oracle 9i, MS SQL 2K, & Acesss....once you got how to connect to the dbs and use datasets, datatables, data adapters etc....they are very, very similar.....Oracles PL SQL is pretty hard to beat though.....
jssk
Member
Interesting article
Here is an interesting article about ADO.NET with an useful object-oriented extension:
http://www.15seconds.com/Issue/031013.htm
The aritcle presents an alternative database for .NET.
Here is an interesting article about ADO.NET with an useful object-oriented extension:
http://www.15seconds.com/Issue/031013.htm
The aritcle presents an alternative database for .NET.
KenpoMatt,
I have to agree with techmanbd. Oracle is a beautiful piece of software from an engineering perspective. Granted, MSSQL is cutesy-poo and ridiculously easy... but if you have any fulltime DBA staff, that really isnt an issue. Dont get me wrong, I like MSSQL 2000 a lot (mostly because Im no DBA). I just like Oracle9i more.
Now with Oracle 10g out, Im curious if Yukon will do anything to tackle grid computing, or if Microsoft plans to keep its nose out of the high-end enterprise market. Anyone else read up on what treats Yukon will give us?
Or, better yet, did anyone go to PDC2003? No one from my office was willing to shell out $4000+ to fly down.
I have to agree with techmanbd. Oracle is a beautiful piece of software from an engineering perspective. Granted, MSSQL is cutesy-poo and ridiculously easy... but if you have any fulltime DBA staff, that really isnt an issue. Dont get me wrong, I like MSSQL 2000 a lot (mostly because Im no DBA). I just like Oracle9i more.
Now with Oracle 10g out, Im curious if Yukon will do anything to tackle grid computing, or if Microsoft plans to keep its nose out of the high-end enterprise market. Anyone else read up on what treats Yukon will give us?
Or, better yet, did anyone go to PDC2003? No one from my office was willing to shell out $4000+ to fly down.
I just want to say that DevExpress have a new database product called XPO (Xpress Presistent Objects) that really rulez...
Thay have a supperb support and the component its improving... Real good tool...
www.devexpress.com
Alex
Thay have a supperb support and the component its improving... Real good tool...
www.devexpress.com
Alex
techmanbd
Well-known member
Earlier I wrote that I use Access at work, well I can change my answer now. They have an IBM AS400. Neevr used it before but hey finally gave me space and my own data folder on it. I will start using it this week. Real cool because I get to learn something new.
OnTheAnvil
Well-known member
Ive used SQL Server 2000 for everything, and I typically refuse to work for clients who dont at least have their databases set up with a ODBC driver that I can use just like SQL Server.
OnTheAnvil
Im happy to know that your business is that healthy that makes you choose only clients with SQL 2000...
MS & its DB have quite a good implementation, and the product itself insnt bad but the real world doesnt let us choose our clients like that... they choose us.
So a good developer must be good dealing with any DB.
A little futher on this, my experience tells me that SQL server isnt allways the best choice. On a wide range of cases, MS Access or MySQL are better than SQL Sever 2000, being lighter and faster...
Alex
Im happy to know that your business is that healthy that makes you choose only clients with SQL 2000...
MS & its DB have quite a good implementation, and the product itself insnt bad but the real world doesnt let us choose our clients like that... they choose us.
So a good developer must be good dealing with any DB.
A little futher on this, my experience tells me that SQL server isnt allways the best choice. On a wide range of cases, MS Access or MySQL are better than SQL Sever 2000, being lighter and faster...
Alex
Access and MySQL are free, thats why companies are using them, but there are several things you need to consider, MySQL doesnt support VIEWS or STORED PROCEDURES, and SQL Server or Oracle do, and believe me a SP can be very helpful processing data or a view, helping you to avoid repeating the same data, or create complex queries in the client side.
An engine, and many more things can make you think what DB you should use, here in the company weve 90 SQL Server servers and 1 Oracle server on a True Unix server (Alpha server) only for California (for the whole country there are many many many more servers in the datacenter in Houston), and this will be amazing, but Oracle is the slowest server.
So all depends on what you really need, and hoping that the company will be willing to spend a few thousands in a good DB, and how good DB designers you have, you can have the best DB in the world and a mediocre DB designer, the result will be like the Oracle server here (thats why Im removing this server soon (I hope))
An engine, and many more things can make you think what DB you should use, here in the company weve 90 SQL Server servers and 1 Oracle server on a True Unix server (Alpha server) only for California (for the whole country there are many many many more servers in the datacenter in Houston), and this will be amazing, but Oracle is the slowest server.
So all depends on what you really need, and hoping that the company will be willing to spend a few thousands in a good DB, and how good DB designers you have, you can have the best DB in the world and a mediocre DB designer, the result will be like the Oracle server here (thats why Im removing this server soon (I hope))
reading American huge ideas allways makes me smille! Not that I have anything against it but just puts a little smille on my face. Just when I was taking my MS Certifications, the exams were allways about managing an infrastructure never less than 10.000 computers!! Ok... that really exists but how many of us work or ever worked on something like that? And more... how many of us would really want that??
Back to DataBases, and considering what I just said, small apps sell... sometimes we earn more money on the small things than on the bigger... if we consider the ratio (time spent)/(income). For these kind of apps sometimes (most of the times) SQL Server/Oracle are just too big!
Not mentionning the installation costs... althow the MSDE is free, someone have to install it!
This way of thinking also applies to programming languages.
Too many people are stuck on their own (only) way of doing stuff discarding any possibility to take knowledge of more technologies that could do their work faster and better...
Do I prefer SQL Server?
Certainlly...
Do I always use it?
Certainlly not!
Alex
michael_hk
Well-known member
I am using MSSQL and MySQL.
Currently only using Access.
I havnt used a Stored Procedure, so I dont know what Im missing... but they sound neat.
I want/need to expand into MySQL for distributed larger scale databases...
The reason why I [/b]LOVE[/b] .Net so much is that I can write my program and really all I need to change are the connections and data adaptors to switch to MSDE or MySQL... or most other database types.
I guess if I become reliant on Stored Procedures, I cant easily take a backwards step into not using them.
I havnt used a Stored Procedure, so I dont know what Im missing... but they sound neat.
I want/need to expand into MySQL for distributed larger scale databases...
The reason why I [/b]LOVE[/b] .Net so much is that I can write my program and really all I need to change are the connections and data adaptors to switch to MSDE or MySQL... or most other database types.
I guess if I become reliant on Stored Procedures, I cant easily take a backwards step into not using them.
That is one thing I may try one day...
Assemble a Linux Server to be a DB Server and try to manage it...
Im only waiting for the v5 witch will support SPs and Triggers among with other several very very nice features...
http://www.mysql.com/products/mysql/
Alex
Assemble a Linux Server to be a DB Server and try to manage it...
Im only waiting for the v5 witch will support SPs and Triggers among with other several very very nice features...
http://www.mysql.com/products/mysql/
Alex