Re: A good Database Alternative to Access & SqlServer Express?

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



On May 13, 8:54 pm, "Larry Smith" <no_spam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am getting ready to write a shareware app in .Net using C# (actually
convert a VB shareware). I currently use a third party dll for the
data management. It is called the Tsunami Record Manager. I know that
it will not work in C# so I am looking for a very light-weight
database system that will work well in C#. I really don't want to use
Access if I can help it and Sql Server Express is really overkill.
Does anyone have any suggestions?

What does "light-weight" mean here. Due to the nature of RDBMSs and what
they offer, I think you'll find any mainstream DB package sufficiently
weighted-down so that it's potentially unsuitable for your needs (depending
on what they are of course). If you do find something that's apparently
satisfactory, you'll also have to consider its dependablity as well. Is it
stable and reliable. Free or public domain packages are also potentially
risky simply because their backers might not be around in a couple of years
(and they could be operating out of the back of a truck for all you know).
What about just using a simple "DataSet" as-is. I'm doing exactly that for
my own app and it's perfectly fine. There are no fancy bells and whistles
such as transaction support but you get a fairly decent DB engine already
built-in for free. For projects with minimal DB requirements it works very
well and costs nothing.

Larry, You are absolutely right, he should take all these into
account.

About public domain applications: I am not sure they are not more
stable than any other products. It's true that their originators will
probably not be there in the future.
But it doesn't mean anything about the quality of the product (See all
GNU license products).
Public domain or GNU products are very powerful, especially for free
ware applications. We should take them into account.

I didn't mention SQL Server Compact since I recall it was restricted
to Windows Mobile platforms only. Now it's not anymore.

Therefor, I think Mark is right. for the purpose of compact, .NET
based applications, SQL Server compact is the best solution.

"SQL Server Compact is a free, easy-to-use, lightweight, and
embeddable version of SQL Server 2005 for developing desktop and
mobile applications."

I think that's the best choice for you, Noble. just as Mark directed.

.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Application Security
    ... these Windows Forms applications, ASP.NET applications, Windows services, or ... I assume that your C# clients are not distributed to end users. ... > There is a global SQL Server userid and password. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.security)
  • Re: Quorum Disk or Majority Node?
    ... LOT of 3rd party applications where every issue is always blamed on ... See "Sizing a Majority Node Set Cluster" ... When SQL Server 2005 starts supporting database mirroring there is ... SQL Server does not NATIVELY support MNS clustering. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: Merge Replication MS SQL CE 3.5 <-> SQL SERVER 2005
    ... subscription, ... I had to uninstall SQL Server v3.5 SP1 and reinstall the standard ... The directory "C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server Compact ... Install SQL Server 2005 ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.ce)
  • Re: Need tips on moving from MSAccess to MSSQL
    ... Thanks for sharing the path you're taking to upgrade. ... > -utilize the sql server response as much as it or I am capable... ... >>>Having applications that today work with MSAccess using dbGO. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.database.ado)
  • Re: VS 6 to VS.Net justification
    ... I am concerned, however, that we are using Sql Server 2005. ... Look for info on VSTO (Visual Studio Tools for Office) VS 2005 version. ... Future applications will need RAD, but I have to admit, I am not convinced ... on that issue from what I've seen yet; let alone convince someone else. ...
    (microsoft.public.vsnet.general)