I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on the
client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems that I
have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for display
purposes.
I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have an
application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be displayed
in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is stored, I
think that information should be generated client side - since it is a for
display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the same
display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this logic in a
SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart database. I
have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me. If I
switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be rewritten...
How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right on this
topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
18  1384 
When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
applications, then this can be done.
..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database access
programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to accomodate
everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature, someone
else may really need something else, etc.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on the
client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems that I
have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for display
purposes.
I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have an
application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be
displayed
in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is stored,
I
think that information should be generated client side - since it is a for
display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the same
display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this logic in a
SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart database. I
have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me. If I
switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be rewritten...
How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right on this
topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
I understand your point.
But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never use it.
This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it. This is
just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better for people
that handle these types of apps.
Thanks for the post...
"Marina" wrote: When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
applications, then this can be done.
..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database access
programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to accomodate
everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature, someone
else may really need something else, etc.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on the
client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems that I
have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for display
purposes.
I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have an
application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be
displayed
in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is stored,
I
think that information should be generated client side - since it is a for
display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the same
display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this logic in a
SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart database. I
have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me. If I
switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be rewritten...
How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right on this
topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
I don't think it's the same thing.
The goal of .NET is to provide tools so that you could write the program you
really need to, even if it means more work. So you have basic tools that you
can use and put together for more advanced tasks. There are a lot of basic
tools, and most of us only use a small subset of them.
But that means there are not too many more advanced tools, which is what you
are looking for.
I just don't think you can compare a data-adapter, which is a pretty basic
data manipulation mechanism, to writing an in-memory database engine.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:30******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... I understand your point.
But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never use it.
This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it. This
is
just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better for
people
that handle these types of apps.
Thanks for the post...
"Marina" wrote:
When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
applications, then this can be done.
..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database access
programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to
accomodate
everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature, someone
else may really need something else, etc.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... >I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on the
> client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems
> that I
> have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for
> display
> purposes.
>
> I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have an
> application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
> architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be
> displayed
> in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is
> stored,
> I
> think that information should be generated client side - since it is a
> for
> display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the
> same
> display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
>
> I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this logic
> in a
> SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart database.
> I
> have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me.
> If I
> switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be
> rewritten...
>
> How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right on
> this
> topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
Ok.
So I get all the basic tools to do remoting (protocols, etc..), but M$ built
that for me. I have all the tools to build a really cool DataGrid, but M$
gave me that too - and they keep trying to make it better.
So, I could write a SQL engine or....Maybe I dont get it. Thanks for the
post.
Anyone else with any thoughts?
"Marina" wrote: I don't think it's the same thing.
The goal of .NET is to provide tools so that you could write the program you
really need to, even if it means more work. So you have basic tools that you
can use and put together for more advanced tasks. There are a lot of basic
tools, and most of us only use a small subset of them.
But that means there are not too many more advanced tools, which is what you
are looking for.
I just don't think you can compare a data-adapter, which is a pretty basic
data manipulation mechanism, to writing an in-memory database engine.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:30******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...I understand your point.
But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never use it.
This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it. This
is
just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better for
people
that handle these types of apps.
Thanks for the post...
"Marina" wrote:
When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
applications, then this can be done.
..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database access
programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to
accomodate
everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature, someone
else may really need something else, etc.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on the
> client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems
> that I
> have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for
> display
> purposes.
>
> I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have an
> application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
> architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be
> displayed
> in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is
> stored,
> I
> think that information should be generated client side - since it is a
> for
> display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the
> same
> display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
>
> I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this logic
> in a
> SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart database.
> I
> have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me.
> If I
> switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be
> rewritten...
>
> How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right on
> this
> topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
One last thing - I can think of serveral tools that M$ has given us (advanced
and not advanced). So I am still not sure where you are coming from.
Maybe you are happy with the toolset they provide, this is just a suggestion
that would help me and I am sure would help others (not everyone).
"Marina" wrote: I don't think it's the same thing.
The goal of .NET is to provide tools so that you could write the program you
really need to, even if it means more work. So you have basic tools that you
can use and put together for more advanced tasks. There are a lot of basic
tools, and most of us only use a small subset of them.
But that means there are not too many more advanced tools, which is what you
are looking for.
I just don't think you can compare a data-adapter, which is a pretty basic
data manipulation mechanism, to writing an in-memory database engine.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:30******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...I understand your point.
But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never use it.
This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it. This
is
just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better for
people
that handle these types of apps.
Thanks for the post...
"Marina" wrote:
When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
applications, then this can be done.
..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database access
programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to
accomodate
everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature, someone
else may really need something else, etc.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on the
> client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems
> that I
> have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for
> display
> purposes.
>
> I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have an
> application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
> architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be
> displayed
> in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is
> stored,
> I
> think that information should be generated client side - since it is a
> for
> display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the
> same
> display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
>
> I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this logic
> in a
> SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart database.
> I
> have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me.
> If I
> switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be
> rewritten...
>
> How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right on
> this
> topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
I am just saying, that I am sure there are plenty of other things out there
that other people want. And all of them would be useful to someone - or to
many people. Microsoft is just prioritizing based on what they see as being
the most feasible and the most useful to the most people. Of course to you,
your request is the most useful, but that is just you. And eventually they
may get to it, who knows.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:CE******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... One last thing - I can think of serveral tools that M$ has given us
(advanced
and not advanced). So I am still not sure where you are coming from.
Maybe you are happy with the toolset they provide, this is just a
suggestion
that would help me and I am sure would help others (not everyone).
"Marina" wrote:
I don't think it's the same thing.
The goal of .NET is to provide tools so that you could write the program
you
really need to, even if it means more work. So you have basic tools that
you
can use and put together for more advanced tasks. There are a lot of
basic
tools, and most of us only use a small subset of them.
But that means there are not too many more advanced tools, which is what
you
are looking for.
I just don't think you can compare a data-adapter, which is a pretty
basic
data manipulation mechanism, to writing an in-memory database engine.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:30******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... >I understand your point.
>
> But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never use
> it.
> This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it.
> This
> is
> just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better for
> people
> that handle these types of apps.
>
> Thanks for the post...
>
> "Marina" wrote:
>
>> When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
>> applications, then this can be done.
>>
>> ..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database access
>> programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to
>> accomodate
>> everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature,
>> someone
>> else may really need something else, etc.
>>
>> "Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>> >I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on
>> >the
>> > client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems
>> > that I
>> > have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for
>> > display
>> > purposes.
>> >
>> > I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have
>> > an
>> > application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
>> > architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be
>> > displayed
>> > in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is
>> > stored,
>> > I
>> > think that information should be generated client side - since it is
>> > a
>> > for
>> > display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the
>> > same
>> > display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
>> >
>> > I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this
>> > logic
>> > in a
>> > SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart
>> > database.
>> > I
>> > have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me.
>> > If I
>> > switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be
>> > rewritten...
>> >
>> > How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right
>> > on
>> > this
>> > topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
>>
>>
>>
I do not disagree. I am not sure where I said my suggestion was the first
priority and above ALL other priorities.
So is this the wrong place for my suggestion?
"Marina" wrote: I am just saying, that I am sure there are plenty of other things out there
that other people want. And all of them would be useful to someone - or to
many people. Microsoft is just prioritizing based on what they see as being
the most feasible and the most useful to the most people. Of course to you,
your request is the most useful, but that is just you. And eventually they
may get to it, who knows.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:CE******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... One last thing - I can think of serveral tools that M$ has given us
(advanced
and not advanced). So I am still not sure where you are coming from.
Maybe you are happy with the toolset they provide, this is just a
suggestion
that would help me and I am sure would help others (not everyone).
"Marina" wrote:
I don't think it's the same thing.
The goal of .NET is to provide tools so that you could write the program
you
really need to, even if it means more work. So you have basic tools that
you
can use and put together for more advanced tasks. There are a lot of
basic
tools, and most of us only use a small subset of them.
But that means there are not too many more advanced tools, which is what
you
are looking for.
I just don't think you can compare a data-adapter, which is a pretty
basic
data manipulation mechanism, to writing an in-memory database engine.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:30******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>I understand your point.
>
> But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never use
> it.
> This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it.
> This
> is
> just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better for
> people
> that handle these types of apps.
>
> Thanks for the post...
>
> "Marina" wrote:
>
>> When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
>> applications, then this can be done.
>>
>> ..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database access
>> programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to
>> accomodate
>> everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature,
>> someone
>> else may really need something else, etc.
>>
>> "Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>> >I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available on
>> >the
>> > client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it seems
>> > that I
>> > have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data for
>> > display
>> > purposes.
>> >
>> > I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We have
>> > an
>> > application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system is
>> > architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to be
>> > displayed
>> > in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is
>> > stored,
>> > I
>> > think that information should be generated client side - since it is
>> > a
>> > for
>> > display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse the
>> > same
>> > display in a different client). Either way - it is a display item.
>> >
>> > I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this
>> > logic
>> > in a
>> > SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart
>> > database.
>> > I
>> > have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to me.
>> > If I
>> > switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be
>> > rewritten...
>> >
>> > How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it right
>> > on
>> > this
>> > topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
>>
>>
>>
Yes, I think it is the wrong place. These newsgroups are for people who have
questions regarding how to write some code, or are having a problem
troubleshooting a problem. It's a place to ask help from the community.
You posting this here made it seem more of a rant of why isn't it here
already, and that it really ought to be. At least to me.
You can make suggestions to microsoft here: http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/produc...k/default.aspx
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:32******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... I do not disagree. I am not sure where I said my suggestion was the first
priority and above ALL other priorities.
So is this the wrong place for my suggestion?
"Marina" wrote:
I am just saying, that I am sure there are plenty of other things out
there
that other people want. And all of them would be useful to someone - or
to
many people. Microsoft is just prioritizing based on what they see as
being
the most feasible and the most useful to the most people. Of course to
you,
your request is the most useful, but that is just you. And eventually
they
may get to it, who knows.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:CE******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com... > One last thing - I can think of serveral tools that M$ has given us
> (advanced
> and not advanced). So I am still not sure where you are coming from.
>
> Maybe you are happy with the toolset they provide, this is just a
> suggestion
> that would help me and I am sure would help others (not everyone).
>
> "Marina" wrote:
>
>> I don't think it's the same thing.
>>
>> The goal of .NET is to provide tools so that you could write the
>> program
>> you
>> really need to, even if it means more work. So you have basic tools
>> that
>> you
>> can use and put together for more advanced tasks. There are a lot of
>> basic
>> tools, and most of us only use a small subset of them.
>>
>> But that means there are not too many more advanced tools, which is
>> what
>> you
>> are looking for.
>>
>> I just don't think you can compare a data-adapter, which is a pretty
>> basic
>> data manipulation mechanism, to writing an in-memory database engine.
>>
>> "Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:30******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>> >I understand your point.
>> >
>> > But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never
>> > use
>> > it.
>> > This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it.
>> > This
>> > is
>> > just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better
>> > for
>> > people
>> > that handle these types of apps.
>> >
>> > Thanks for the post...
>> >
>> > "Marina" wrote:
>> >
>> >> When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
>> >> applications, then this can be done.
>> >>
>> >> ..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database
>> >> access
>> >> programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to
>> >> accomodate
>> >> everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature,
>> >> someone
>> >> else may really need something else, etc.
>> >>
>> >> "Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in
>> >> message
>> >> news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>> >> >I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available
>> >> >on
>> >> >the
>> >> > client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it
>> >> > seems
>> >> > that I
>> >> > have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data
>> >> > for
>> >> > display
>> >> > purposes.
>> >> >
>> >> > I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We
>> >> > have
>> >> > an
>> >> > application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system
>> >> > is
>> >> > architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to
>> >> > be
>> >> > displayed
>> >> > in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is
>> >> > stored,
>> >> > I
>> >> > think that information should be generated client side - since it
>> >> > is
>> >> > a
>> >> > for
>> >> > display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse
>> >> > the
>> >> > same
>> >> > display in a different client). Either way - it is a display
>> >> > item.
>> >> >
>> >> > I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this
>> >> > logic
>> >> > in a
>> >> > SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart
>> >> > database.
>> >> > I
>> >> > have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to
>> >> > me.
>> >> > If I
>> >> > switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be
>> >> > rewritten...
>> >> >
>> >> > How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it
>> >> > right
>> >> > on
>> >> > this
>> >> > topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
It is not a rant and I am not sure where you got that from. I think maybe
you need to re-read the posts and let me know where you think it went wrong.
I merely stated this was a suggestion for a feature. I said that in about
all of my posts. I placed this in the dotnet.general newsgroup and labeled
it as a General Comment (not a question).
Did we go wrong at the mention of "FoxPro"? I was explaining why I was
asking for the feature. I actually like .NET for some tasks but not all.
You are correct - this would eliminate one of my problems with .NET. Am I
"ranting" - I do not think so.
It only took 8 posts (minus my one clarification) to find out where to ask
for a feature. Thanks for that.
"Marina" wrote: Yes, I think it is the wrong place. These newsgroups are for people who have
questions regarding how to write some code, or are having a problem
troubleshooting a problem. It's a place to ask help from the community.
You posting this here made it seem more of a rant of why isn't it here
already, and that it really ought to be. At least to me.
You can make suggestions to microsoft here:
http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/produc...k/default.aspx
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:32******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...I do not disagree. I am not sure where I said my suggestion was the first
priority and above ALL other priorities.
So is this the wrong place for my suggestion?
"Marina" wrote:
I am just saying, that I am sure there are plenty of other things out
there
that other people want. And all of them would be useful to someone - or
to
many people. Microsoft is just prioritizing based on what they see as
being
the most feasible and the most useful to the most people. Of course to
you,
your request is the most useful, but that is just you. And eventually
they
may get to it, who knows.
"Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in message
news:CE******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
> One last thing - I can think of serveral tools that M$ has given us
> (advanced
> and not advanced). So I am still not sure where you are coming from.
>
> Maybe you are happy with the toolset they provide, this is just a
> suggestion
> that would help me and I am sure would help others (not everyone).
>
> "Marina" wrote:
>
>> I don't think it's the same thing.
>>
>> The goal of .NET is to provide tools so that you could write the
>> program
>> you
>> really need to, even if it means more work. So you have basic tools
>> that
>> you
>> can use and put together for more advanced tasks. There are a lot of
>> basic
>> tools, and most of us only use a small subset of them.
>>
>> But that means there are not too many more advanced tools, which is
>> what
>> you
>> are looking for.
>>
>> I just don't think you can compare a data-adapter, which is a pretty
>> basic
>> data manipulation mechanism, to writing an in-memory database engine.
>>
>> "Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:30******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>> >I understand your point.
>> >
>> > But every .NET developer has access to a DataAdapter but may never
>> > use
>> > it.
>> > This can be the same type of thing - it is available if you need it.
>> > This
>> > is
>> > just a suggestion as to how M$ can make their data handling better
>> > for
>> > people
>> > that handle these types of apps.
>> >
>> > Thanks for the post...
>> >
>> > "Marina" wrote:
>> >
>> >> When a technology is developed for writing very specific types of
>> >> applications, then this can be done.
>> >>
>> >> ..NET can be used to program anything - video games, database
>> >> access
>> >> programs, etc. So it really becomes harder to provide features to
>> >> accomodate
>> >> everyone who may be writing anything. You may need this feature,
>> >> someone
>> >> else may really need something else, etc.
>> >>
>> >> "Ty Salistean" <Ty*********@di scussions.micro soft.com> wrote in
>> >> message
>> >> news:57******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...
>> >> >I think it would be nice if we could have a SQL engine available
>> >> >on
>> >> >the
>> >> > client side. I primarily do Windows Forms programming and it
>> >> > seems
>> >> > that I
>> >> > have to make alot of calls accross the wire to manipulate data
>> >> > for
>> >> > display
>> >> > purposes.
>> >> >
>> >> > I am a FoxPro guy but I have been in .NET for 1 year now. We
>> >> > have
>> >> > an
>> >> > application in FoxPro hitting SQL Server and I think that system
>> >> > is
>> >> > architected well. If I have a screen that requires the data to
>> >> > be
>> >> > displayed
>> >> > in a certain way that is completly different than how the data is
>> >> > stored,
>> >> > I
>> >> > think that information should be generated client side - since it
>> >> > is
>> >> > a
>> >> > for
>> >> > display only (I could put it in business objects so I can reuse
>> >> > the
>> >> > same
>> >> > display in a different client). Either way - it is a display
>> >> > item.
>> >> >
>> >> > I need to do this in a SQL SP for .NET. I feel by placing this
>> >> > logic
>> >> > in a
>> >> > SQL SP, I am moving that logic to a 'procedural' based smart
>> >> > database.
>> >> > I
>> >> > have a problem with that. This just does not seem productive to
>> >> > me.
>> >> > If I
>> >> > switch my database, alot of my business logic will need to be
>> >> > rewritten...
>> >> >
>> >> > How do we get M$ ear to ask for this? I think FoxPro got it
>> >> > right
>> >> > on
>> >> > this
>> >> > topic...hopeful ly .NET will follow.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: Dan Koster |
last post by:
I have three weeks of history for all user accounts stored in a DataSet (dsAccountsHistory). I want to be able to narrow that data down to one specific user, at runtime, without having to make another round-trip to the dadabase. I would love to be able to do it with an SQL command like "select * from dsAccountsHistory where dsAccountsHistory.custId=targetId" but a DataAdapter only lets you connect to a database, not a DataSet. Any suggestions
...
|
by: Bill C. |
last post by:
Hi,
I've got a simple console app that just reads an XML file into a DataSet
then prints out a description of each table in the DataSet, including
column names and row values for each column. I'm getting some strange
results depending the input XML file I use. I was wondering if somebody
could help me understand what is going on or point me to a good reference.
The code for my program looks like this:
|
by: MDB |
last post by:
I'd normally Google for a question like this, and hope to snag a few
examples along with the answer, but this time I can't see to get the
keywords specific enough.
Or I'd ask coworkers, but they're just as new to ASP.NET as I am.
Is it possible to have a dataset filled with all the records in an SQL table
(on the small side, maybe three hundred records total), and then query that
table for subsets of data, e.q. a simple WHERE clause,...
|
by: JIM.H. |
last post by:
Hello,
Can I send a dataset as a parameter into stored procedure and import data to
a table in the stored procedure?
Thanks,
Jim.
|
by: Roy Lawson |
last post by:
I am having no problems connecting to a DB, creating a DataAdapter,
and creating a dataset...and connecting to the data. Using the
builtin data objects to do all this.
My only problem now is navigating through the data. I can get the
data into a datagrid without any problems, but I want the data to show
up in textboxes and use some sort of move next, move previous, move
last, etc (like in VB6) command to navigate the data (using...
| | |
by: Fred |
last post by:
I want to use a dataset so that I can obtain data from a number of sources
and put it into one table. Using dataadaptors this seems to work well.
Now I have a table (Forecast) in the dataset with columns:
Rep, Area, Period, Qty.
I want to display this data on a datagrid like:
Rep, Period1_Qty, Period2_Qty, .. Period7_Qty
where the period1_Qty is the sum of the Qtys for that Rep and for a
|
by: dauphian |
last post by:
Hello,
I am new to .net and am trying to build a report application that
queries 4 different tables based on a id, and I need to return them in
the same table for easy viewing.
Basically, I have one querie that grabs all of the id's I need for the
other 4 queries, but I am not sure how to get them into a DataTable or
DataSet, or if that is the best way to do this. Seperately the queries
all work with no problems.
|
by: Ryan Ramsey |
last post by:
I am looking for some advice or best practices on how to do this..
I have an XML file, that I read into a dataset via ReadXML:
PlayersDataSet.Clear();
PlayersDataSet.ReadXml(filePath);
What I would like to do is query the dataset so I can search for people from
California, or people older than 65 or something?
|
by: Tom |
last post by:
I have a dataTable being returned from my datalayet, I need to convert it to
a dataSet so I can do some data manipulation to it prior to populating my
datagrid. How can I convert the datatable to a dataset?
|
by: onecorp |
last post by:
I have a SQL table comprised of 31 columns.
The first column is simply an id column, the next 30 columns are labelled
,....
The numerical columns have a tinyint type and the data stored is either 1 or
null.
I wish to count the number of times a one appears in one column
simultaneously with another column:
eg count the number of times 1 appears in column and 1 also appears in
column in the same row:
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
| | |
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth.
The Art of Business Website Design
Your website is...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own....
Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
|
by: TSSRALBI |
last post by:
Hello
I'm a network technician in training and I need your help.
I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs.
The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols.
I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
|
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
| | |
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
|
by: bsmnconsultancy |
last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...
| |
