Re: Question for the OO Gurus

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: flu (flu8349nospam_at_nospam.yahoo.com)
Date: 02/03/05 

Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 06:48:22 GMT

I haven't had the opportunity to test it under load but it seems to perform
just fine under under light conditions. The tools are also adequate. The
.NET support works seamlessly.

I've got used to Enterprise Manager and was glad to see MySQL had a version.

I still prefer SQL Server but if price is a concern, you can't beat free.

flu

"Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message
news:eSRaMRFCFHA.3416@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> did you find a performance gain with mysql over sql?
>
> we moved from informix to mysql for our data analysis solutions because
> mysql showed at least a 65% performance gain for light to moderate
> concurrent load. And it don't cost 20grand per processor. Some of the
> advanced features are lacking, but all in all, i'd say it was a sound
> investment.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Alvin Bruney [MVP ASP.NET]
>
> [Shameless Author plug]
> The Microsoft Office Web Components Black Book with .NET
> Now Available @ http://tinyurl.com/27***
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "flu" <flu8349nospam@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:9UCLd.25771$wZ2.25443@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>> Not my choice, but the client's. It is free and runs on unix as well as
>> windows.
>>
>> flu
>>
>>
>> "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message
>> news:OKVDuU7BFHA.1392@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>> Curiously, what is the reason for choosing mysql over sql?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Alvin Bruney [MVP ASP.NET]
>>>
>>> [Shameless Author plug]
>>> The Microsoft Office Web Components Black Book with .NET
>>> Now Available @ http://tinyurl.com/27***
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> "James Curran" <jamescurran@mvps.org> wrote in message
>>> news:%236oXP%236BFHA.1408@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>> Well, you originally would have had:
>>>>
>>>> SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection();
>>>>
>>>> Using a higher level class you would have had:
>>>>
>>>> IDbConnection conn = new SqlConnection();
>>>>
>>>> Which means that you would have had to change one spot instead of
>>>> two --- or
>>>> click "Replace" in the "Find/Replace" dialog half as many times --- or
>>>> click
>>>> "Replace All" exactly the same number of time.
>>>>
>>>> The bottom line is that the Data Access Layer of your code & the
>>>> Database
>>>> itself are intimately tied, and trying abstract it just shifts the
>>>> problem
>>>> somewhere else.
>>>>
>>>> If, for some reason, you absolutely need multiple database support, you
>>>> could do something like:
>>>>
>>>> IDbConnection NewConnection()
>>>> {
>>>> string dbType = GetDbTypeForAppConfig();
>>>> switch (dbType)
>>>> {
>>>> case 'sqlserver':
>>>> return SqlConnection();
>>>> case 'mysql':
>>>> return MySqlConnection();
>>>> case 'oracle':
>>>> // etc
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "flu" <flu8349nospam@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:7DiLd.18280$wZ2.10235@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>>> I recently had to modify an application that had originally been
>>>>> written
>>>> for
>>>>> SQL Server to work with MySQL. I found myself replacing all of the
>>>>> declarations for the connection and command objects with their MySQL
>>>>> class
>>>>> equivalents.
>>>>>
>>>>> In hindsight it is clear my code should have been written originally
>>>>> for
>>>>> some basic or super SQL class that SQLServer, MySQL, or ODBC,
>>>>> implements.
>>>>> Ideally this could be determined even at run time.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a problem I'm sure others in this group have run into.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am interested in how you have approached this problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> TIA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Quantcast