I am a newcomer to ASP, and would like to experiment with it by writing a website for a club at my school using .net 2008 and the mySql database available from the school's apache server. What is the best way to set this up, since I see a lot of options to connect the web app to SQL Server or Oracle databases, but I'm nervous that it won't work correctly with mySql.
Also, will I still be able to use LINQ queries?
Get a hold of the MySQL Connector for ASP.NET and start coding as usual for MySQL. the connector gives you all the advantages of data adapters, data readers, etc. in the typical ADO.NET structure you are used to for SQL or Oracle. That way if you do swap things out on the back end in the future, you won't have to worry about swapping out all your connect/query code.
Check out this url: http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/dotnet/index.html
Related
I know PHP and how to use MySQL with it but now I am moving onto ASP but which common database is used with ASP (ie. the equivalent to MySQL)?
Microsoft SQL Server.
This is commonly known as WISA (Windows, IIS, SQL Server, ASP) stack.
It is Sql Server (Express editions are free) but you shouldn't let this be your only deciding factor. Besides, it doesn't really matter. The db is the back end, unseen by your clients, and you can connect to many, many types of DBs from ASP just as well as to Sql Server.
Your main consideration should be features, scalability etc. For the sake of picking up this dev stack quickly I would suggest sticking with MySql for you. That would be one less rather large piece of technology to learn!
Also: Are you moving onto ASP (classic) or ASP.NET? If it is ASP I would recommend that you reconsider and choose a more modern web development methodology such as ASP.NET MVC or Silverlight. I think that you will find ASP.NET MVC to your liking. In some ways it feels like ASP or PHP of old but with much more flexibility.
Usually it's Microsoft SQL Server.
If you want a free alternative you could try with Microsoft SQL Server Express, which is a scaled down version.
Here you can find more informations about the different versions.
MS SQL server is commonly used with ASP (Classic and .NET). There are many different versions of SQL (SQL Express, Standard Edition, Enterprise etc)
I am developing an ASP.NET application in which I need to provide support for two databases, MySql and MS SQL Server 2005 and 2008 (one database will be used at a time).
How will I configure the ASP.NET app to connect with different databases without reinstalling the app (i.e. using configuration)?
How will I configure LINQ?
Shouldn't I use NHibernate?
Use basic Linq to SQL structures (nothing database specific) and by just changing the connection string should do the trick. Linq expression trees are transformed to SQL by Linq enabled drivers (i.e. they know how to handle the expression tree).
Here is better way of doing it: Multiple database support with Entity Framework.
I'm in the market for an ASP.NET host to start learning on and to host personal projects. I've noticed most of them provided both MySQL and MS SQL databases. However, usually they will only provided a couple MS SQL databases, but a large number (like 10) MySQL Databases.
Can I use a MySQL database as a back end to a ASP.NET website? If so why would I want to pay extra to use MS SQL over MySQL?
Yes you can use MySQL to drive a website using ASP.NET or any other web development technology for that matter. The reason for choosing SQL Server over MySQL would if there were features or performance characteristics you wanted in SQL Server that did not exist in MySQL. For example, common-table expressions do not exist in MySQL. If there are no features in either that are driving your decision, then it comes down to personal preference and cost.
If you're more comfortable with Sql Server then clearly it'd be worth going down that route, for a small scale site it really does come down to personal preference. That said there are things such as the asp.net membership providers that come, by default, with support for Sql Server as opposed to MySql so that could be a deciding factor for you.
Ultimately, it comes down to personal choice. Which do you prefer and are you willing to pay if Sql Server is your preference?
I need to develop a dynamic web page retrieve data from a stored procedure on a SQL Server.
Considering the licensing issue, development resources, security and maintainability, can someone suggest a suitable platform for this project?
I have a Ubuntu server running Drupal and also a Windows Server 2003 running SQL Server 2000 and IIS for FTP server only.
Is ASP.NET and Reporting Service the natural choice? What are my other options? Ruby On Rails? Since the SQL Server on the server is mission critical and I don't feel very comfortable asking anymore from it.
SSRS is very good for the price; though in SQL 2000 its a bit limited - especially for charting. If you have a small budget you could write nice looking reports using stored procedures and something like telerik reporting if you want to do a bit more of the work on the web server. There is a trial version you could use for a quick prototype to see how it fits in; but it works very nicely with asp.net development and is nicely integrated with Visual Studio.
Client has a bunch of Access databases and associated reports.
He wants to make the reports available (live, not snapshots) via a secure extranet.
He's willing to recreate the reports using a proprietary GUI if necessary, but ideally would like a solution that exports his reports "as is" to the web.
Had a look at Caspio Bridge. It's pretty slick but doesn't appear to offer grouping and summing (key requirement) without a nasty Javascript hack - seems like a rather glaring omission to me!
Any suggestions?
I'm an ASP.NET developer so if there's coding involved, an ASP.NET based solution would be preferred.
You can try Access Reporter.
http://www.ssw.com.au/ssw/AccessReporter/Default.aspx
You might like to consider Access 2010, point 3 of the linked document says:
Access your application, data, or
forms from virtually anywhere.
Extend your database to the Web so
that users without an Access client
can open Web forms and reports via a
browser and changes are automatically
synchronized.1 Or work on your Web
database offline, make your design and
data changes, and then sync them to
Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 when
you’re reconnected. With Access 2010
and SharePoint Server 2010, your data
can be protected centrally to meet
data compliance, backup, and audit
requirements, providing you with
increased accessibility and
manageability.
-- http://www.microsoft.com/office/2010/en/access/default.aspx
SQL Server Express edition is free. It includes Reporting Services
http://www.microsoft.com/Sqlserver/2005/en/us/express.aspx
You can connect to the MS Access database (or any other database that you have OLEDB or ODBC connectivity for)
For your existing reports, here is a link on how to migrate just the reports to SQL Server (leave data in MS Access)
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc966391.aspx
Actually, the suggestion being given here is to move your back and data up to SQL server , but keep your front end application part as is in Access.
So the suggestion isn’t to move your application to SQL server. The suggestion here is to move only the data part of your application to SQL server but continue to use the desktop access application.
So, you link your tables to sql server, and continue to use the access application.
What this means that is you can use SQL server reporting services, or some other web based interface that pulls the data from SQL server. So your access application will be directly updating the data on that SQL server.
This setup works well since you not tying to shuttle data between two separate systems. I know a number of companies that successfully migrated their backend data to SQL server for this very purpose of allowing the Executives and the company Managers to view reports on a web based system.
However, they did not have to throw out or lose the investment and time they spent building the access application part.