I am new to asp.net and I am trying to learn Linq to SQL. So I have found two different ways to pull from the database. The normal linq to SQL way and the direct SQL statement way.
I have both working, but I want to know which way is the accepted standard? I want to use straight SQL statements, because that is what I am use to, but I am trying to go with whatever is best practice.
Thanks
Take a look at the selected answer to this popular question.
Entity Framework became the preferred way to interact with a SQL database in ~2008.
Much of the heavy lifting in database calls and transactions is greatly simplified in EF.
If you continue to use Linq to SQL and want to learn from the master, have a look at Scott Guthrie's Post.
Entity Framework is to be Microsoft's best practice solution. Once you learn LINQ you will find it is much easier to code.
Personally, I much prefer using LINQ and have since the moment I learned it. You can turn on the log feature while you are learning and can see the SQL that gets created. If you have performance concerns and need to hand tweak SQL you can always revert to that. Just not having to hard code strings with table and field names makes code more maintainable and with intellisense also much more enjoyable to write.
There isn't really an accepted standard between straight SQL and LINQ (or any other ORM). It depends on what environment you're using it in, and what you want to do. However, Microsoft has announced that the LINQ to SQL project isn't going to be continued, so I suggest you consider the ADO.NET Entity Framework (which supports LINQ via LINQ to Entities) instead.
Refer to the following:
ADO.NET and LINQ to SQL
Advantages & Disadvantages of LINQ
Performance of LINQ to SQL over Normal Stored procedure
LINQ-to-SQL and Stored Procedures
Related
I'm using both Dapper and simple.Data in my application, Dapper for retrieving data only and other operations by Simple.Data. I just need to know if using Simple.Data is better approach in all operations except retrieval and is it the same in performance like using ExecuteNonQuery in Dapper?
In my experience, I would suggest Simple.Data. This is mostly because Simple.Data has support for CRUD operations out of the box. (https://github.com/markrendle/Simple.Data/wiki/Inserting-and-updating-data). They are both extremely fast, but I think for an application doing mostly CRUDs, I would pick Simple.Data out of those two.
You may also want to consider ORMLite. Anything from the ServiceStack library is fantastic.
Thanks. Happy Coding!
Both have CRUD support now, so if you made an investment in Dapper, just add one of these nugets and you're good to go!
Dapper.Extensions
Dapper with Rainbow
Dapper.Contrib over 5K users starred this!!!
I want to create a web application using ASP.NET. Which method should I use, LINQ or SQL query? Which gives the best performance? Please help me.
This is an excellent series by a CLR Performance Architect describing LINQ to SQL performance: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ricom/archive/2007/06/22/dlinq-linq-to-sql-performance-part-1.aspx
Performance-wise I think you'll always be better off with SQL. If you take a look at the generated SQL code which LINQ produces you'll notice that it's not always that top notch.
On the other hand, LINQ isn't slow. It's not as fast as SQL, but it's definitely not slow. If you think about the advantages LINQ provides I would always prefer LINQ over SQL if I have the choice.
If performance is the BIG issue tho, sticking with SQL might be your best shot. If you were just wondering if the difference was that major, and if you don't expect database-performance to be a bottleneck I'd go for LINQ.
I'm starting a new project based on ASP.NET and Windows server.
The application is planned to be pretty big and serve large amount of clients pulling and updating high freq. changing data.
I have previously created projects with Linq-To-Sql or with Ado.Net.
My plan for this project is to use VS2010 and the new EF4 framework.
It would be great to hear other
programmers options about development
with Entity Framework
Pros and cons from previous
experience?
Do you think EF4 is ready for
production?
Should i take the risk or just stick with plain old good ADO.NET?
Whether EF4 is really ready for production is a bit hard to say since it's not officially been released yet.... but all the preliminary experiences and reports about it seem to indicate it's quite good.
However: you need to take into consideration what EF is trying to solve; it's a two-layer approach, one layer maps to your physical storage schema in your database (and supports multiple backends), and the second layer is your conceptual model you program against. And of course, there's the need for a mapping between those two layers.
So EF4 is great if you have a large number of tables, if you have multiple backends to support, if you need to be able to map a physical schema to a different conceptual schema, and so forth. It's great for complex enterprise level applications.
BUT that comes at a cost - those extra layers do have an impact on performance, complexity, maintainability. If you need those features, you'll be happy to pay that price, no question. But do you need that??
Sure, you could go back to straight ADO.NET - but do you really want to fiddle around with DataTables, DataRows, and untyped Row["RowName"] constructs again?? REALLY???
So my recommendation would be this:
if you need only SQL Server as your backend
if you have a fairly simple and straightforward mapping of one database table to one entity object in your model
then: use Linq-to-SQL ! Why not?? It's still totally supported by Microsoft in .NET 4 - heck, they even did bugfixes and added a few bits and pieces - it's fast, it's efficient, it's lean and mean - so why not??
My advice is use both. At first I thought I would only use linq to sql and never have to touch ado.net ever again ( what made me happy lol).
Now I am using both because some things linq to sql(and any ORM like EF) can't do. I had to do some mass inserts and I did it first with linq to sql and to do 500 records it took over 6mins(2 mins for validation rules rest was inserting into the db).
I changed it to sql bulk copy and now it is down to 2min and 4 seconds(4 seconds to do all inserts)
But like marc_s said I really did not want to fiddle around with DataTables, DataRows, and untyped Row["RowName"].
Say my table was like 10 columns long and called Table A. What I did was I used linq to sql and made a Table A class( new TableA()) object and populated it with data. I then would pass this object to a method that created the datarow.
So linq to sql saved me some time because I probably would have made a class as I would not have wanted to pass in 10 parameters into the method that makes the data row. I also feel it gives a bit of typeness back as you have to pass in the right object to use that method so less chance of passing in the wrong data.
Finally you can still use linq to sql to call Stored procedures and that is like one line of code.
So I would use both when ever you notice that linq to sql (or in your case EF) is slow then just write a SP and call it through EF. If you need to do straight ado.net evaluate what you need to do maybe you can use EF for most of the code(so you can at least work with objects) and only for that small portion ado.net sort of what I did with sql bulk copy.
EF 4 is now more similar to LINQ to SQL, in the good ways; it has the FK keys right in the object, has add methods right in the object sets, and a lot of other nice features. THe designer is much improved, and the major plus is that it works with SQL and Oracle, and maybe some others (as long as the provider supports it) instead of LINQ to SQL with only SQL Server.
EF is the future; the ADO.NET data services is a web service add on, plus it supports POCO and T4 generation, and any new features will support this (LINQ to SQL is maintenance only, and data sets won't be getting any changes any more).
HTH.
I am working on architecture of mid sized web application & for my DAL layer i am having 3 options
1) Traditional Stored proc Based Architecture (Using NTiers Template of Codesmith)
2) LINQ To SQL (or PLINQO Template of codesmith)
3) LINQ To Entity
From above LINQ to Entity is out of reach as we need to start application very quickly and we don't have the sufficient skillset for the same and as team has never worked on any OR/M tools it will be steep learning curve for them (This is what i read some where)
I prefer to go ahead with LINQ to SQL (But only fear is microsoft is not going to support or enhance LINQ to SQL further), from my point of view if microsoft is not going to enhance it further i am not having any issue as whatever feature i require in my project it is sufficient.
Now my issue is should i use linq to sql or should i stick to traditional architecture ?
OR else any other option is there ...
EDIT : I am going to use SQL Server as database and it does not require to interact with any other database
One of the most important objective in designing DAL Layer is faster development and maintainability for future database table changes, as there are chances that field may increase or decrease in future.
Also if you feel that any ORM tool is really good and does not have steep learning curve then also we can use
Please provide suggestions
As you are working in medium size project, I would suggest you to use LINQ-TO-SQL because of these advantages
Advantages using LINQ to SQL:
•No magic strings, like you have in SQL queries
•Intellisense
•Compile check when database changes
•Faster development
•Unit of work pattern (context)
•Auto-generated domain objects that are usable small projects
•Lazy loading.
•Learning to write linq queries/lambdas is a must learn for .NET developers.
Regarding performance:
•Most likely the performance is not going to be a problem in most solutions. To pre-optimize is an anti-pattern. If you later see that some areas of the application are to slow, you can analyze these parts, and in some cases even swap some linq queries with stored procedures or ADO.NET.
•In many cases the lazy loading feature can speed up performance, or at least simplify the code a lot.
Regarding debuging:
•In my opinion debuging Linq2Sql is much easier than both stored procedures and ADO.NET. I recommend that you take a look at Linq2Sql Debug Visualizer, which enables you to see the query, and even trigger an execute to see the result when debugging.
•You can also configure the context to write all sql queries to the console window, more information here
Regarding another layer:
•Linq2Sql can be seen as another layer, but it is a purely data access layer. Stored procedures is also another layer of code, and I have seen many cases where part of the business logic has been implemented into stored procedures. This is much worse in my opinion because you are then splitting the business layer into two places, and it will be harder for developers to get a clear view of the business domain.
There is no absolutely preffered way of writing DAL. These are all options. Which one to choose depends on your project, your skills and your inclinations.
Normally, with LINQ you can expect to be more productive. On the other hand, the DAL built with stored procedures can be expected to perform faster.
The issue only comes when you need some specific queries that the default LINQ to SQL provider won't be able to generate to be blazingly fast. In that case you will have to tap into your LINQ code to plug in your custom stored procedures where needed.
Regarding LINQ to SQL support and further development, it was grounded a long time ago already. So no official further development. Note: that is true for LINQ to SQL (it will be taken over by EF) relational solution, not for the main LINQ functionality.
Entity Framework in its v.1 only received massive critics. You're advised to wait until v2 comes out.
The most important limitation with LINQ (over Entity Framework or any other popular ORM) is that it doesn't support 1 to n mappings. That is, each your LINQ class can only map to a single table, not represent some sort of view over several others. Maybe it's not important to you, but maybe it is. Depends on your project.
The argument of stored procedures vs ORM's is long-standing and unlikely to be resolved any time soon. My recommendation would be to go with an ORM (Linq-to-Sql in your case).
Yes, stored procedures will always be faster since the queries are precompiled. The real question you have to ask yourself is whether you have such a performance-intensive system that your users will actually notice the difference. Keep in mind that using stored procedures means that you will need to manually write all your own queries where using an ORM does this for you. This usually means that an ORM will speed up your development.
Since you mention that speeding up development time is one of your goals I would recommend Linq-to-Sql - otherwise you will basically write the entire DAL yourself.
All of the options you've provided have significant drawbacks. None of them meet the requirements you've set out.
You need to prioritize what is most important for you.
If learning curve is your biggest issue, stay away from all ORMs if you are already comfortable with ADO.NET, DataTables, etc.
If development speed is your biggest issue, you should learn an ORM and go that route. The easiest ORM to recommend is NHibernate. Every other ORM has significant weaknesses. NHibernate works in the vast majority of projects, whereas other ORMs are much more situationally appropriate (depending on your DB design, model design, agility requirements, legacy schema support, etc.). All ORMs have learning curves, they just come into play at different times and in different ways.
Just to expand on #Developer Art, using the traditional stored proc approach enables you to put business logic in the database. Usually you will want to avoid this, but sometimes it is necessary to do. Not to mention you could also enforce constraints and permissions at the database level using this approach. It all depends on your requirements.
With the limitations mention I would say just stick to adhoc/custom queries and ADO.NET and not go for any jazzy stuff. Also stored procedure based DAL are faster is a notion based lame arguments like stored procedures are precompiled but they are not. All that they have is query plan cache. So lesser the investment in stored procedures the better you are. My advice ADO.Net and custom dynamic queries constructed from entity objects.
I have an existing web app that has a data layer and a bll that calls the data layer. The data layer is ado.net that calls stored procedures.
I created another project in vs.net for linq-to-sql, dragged all my tables over.
Would it be wise to just start using linq or should I spend the time and re-write all the db logic in linq just so I don't have any issues having 2 data layers!
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
Why would you want to rewrite completely your perfectly working data layer? ADO.NET + stored procedures is a great choice. Keep it. At the same time you can start playing with LINQ.
Anyway, you will need some practice with LINQ to see what it can and what it cannot do before you will be able to decide on the new data layer architecture. There are some situations that LINQ cannot handle right out of the box, so you will need to use tricks or substitute default implementation with your own queries. At the end of the day you may have decided, it was not worth it.
My suggestion is to gain some experience with it separately and not start rewriting everything completely just because LINQ is cool.
Unless your current data layer is broken for some reason, don't just start implementing a new one, just because you can.
Although if currently the datalayer consists of using stored procedures and that becomes cumbersome to maintain, switching to L2S (or any other OR/M for that matter) might be a valid reason. Just don't think it'll be only a matter of dragging some columns to a canvas and be done. Dependent if there's any logic in the sprocs, the logic has to exist somewhere...
I'd say until you can justify the costs of switching your datalayer entirly, stick with your current implementation.
Please be clear: there is a major difference between Linq and LinqToSql. Linq is great and you should be using it if at all possible. LinqToSql is not great and has many problems:
Do not use the Visual Studio 2008 LinqToSql O/R Designer
The drawbacks of adopting Linq To Sql
To use Linq, you need an ORM of some sort. You have many options for ORMs in the .NET world. If you like what LinqToSql offers, you may be most comfortable using SubSonic. In the long run, NHibernate is the best choice for a .NET ORM right now. I wrote a lot more on choosing a .NET ORM here:
.NET and ORM - Decisions, decisions
In the end, there is no reason you can't have two or more different data layer technologies in the same application. There are good reasons not to do this however and so it should be avoided if at all possible.
Also, here's a compelling write-up against using stored procedures:
Stored procedures are bad, m'kay?