Re: XML vs SQL Server
- From: "sloan" <sloan@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:13:03 -0500
Everyone else has made good points...especially in regards to why you pick a
rdbms to begin with over txt, excel or other files.
My input will be this. You can architect your code so you're now
screwballed in the future if you need to swap out for a different dataStore.
(Aka, when you figure out that xml is too slow because your data grew too
big).
See:
http://sholliday.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!A68482B9628A842A!176.entry
This shows how to write an interface, and bring back 1 of several concretes
depending on which rdbms you might pick.
....
(Note, I use the term "rdbms" very loosely with backends like Access(Jet
database), Excel and Xml. These are datastores, not really rdbms systems).
...........
"shapper" <mdmoura@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:709fb04a-767e-4691-ae09-b42a14f2712e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
When a web application (site) is small in terms of data I usually use
XML files.
For example, at the moment I have a web site with the following XML
files (Note: I use XML as they would be SQL Server tables):
Users, UsersRoles, Roles, Texts, Albums and Photos.
To give you an idea I will have at its maximum:
4 Users, 2 Roles, (8 UsersRoles), 4 Texts, 10 Albums and 200 Photos.
Each photo will have a maximum of 40KB. Most of them only 10 or 20 KB.
The functionality I need is really simple: Create, Delete, Get and
Update. No really complex queries.
Do you think for this kind of project a XML structure to hold data
rather then SQL Server is ok?
Will I have a huge problem in performance?
I have this implemented and it is working quite fine.
Where do you think it is the "point" of using a SQL database instead
of XMl files?
Thanks,
Miguel
.
- References:
- XML vs SQL Server
- From: shapper
- XML vs SQL Server
- Prev by Date: WPF Browser App Size/Dimensions
- Next by Date: Follow up
- Previous by thread: Re: XML vs SQL Server
- Next by thread: IWshRuntimeLibrary
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|