Re: Database Sync Question
- From: Marc Gravell <marc.gravell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:31:04 -0700
and wouldn't work out well.
Which; SqlDependency? I agree... minimising the data you need at the
client, however, seems pretty OK ;-p
And I want to minimize network traffic.
So why drag an entire table over? Keep the data at the server, and
just hold conversations with it - either to the database server
itself, or a web-service.
If you really must do it your way, then a delete trigger that pumps
into a "deleted" table may be of use - you can use the identity in the
table to get just the updates you haven't seen, and can purge any
values older than your supported range - perhaps half an hour. Then in
the same way that you query for updates/inserts, just query for
deletes too.
Marc
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Database Sync Question
- From: wackyphill
- Re: Database Sync Question
- References:
- Database Sync Question
- From: wackyphill
- Re: Database Sync Question
- From: Marc Gravell
- Re: Database Sync Question
- From: wackyphill
- Database Sync Question
- Prev by Date: Double-click a folder browser dialog?
- Next by Date: Retrieve tag A from html
- Previous by thread: Re: Database Sync Question
- Next by thread: Re: Database Sync Question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|