Closest method to a VBA recordset

[Rob]

Hi

Remember back in VBA, you could easily create a recordset, loop thru the
rows, and store the values of the columns to variables...

I am not even talking about writing back to the data...

It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which appears to
store a whole row of data into one long string, which I would then have to
use some parsing method in order to determine the value of a specific column
of data.

Or...

I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load and
loop thru it....

Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and return
the value of a column name I specifiy ?

[Spam Catcher]

"Rob" <ro***@yahoo.comwrote in
news:Ip******************************@comcast.com:

It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which
appears to store a whole row of data into one long string, which I
would then have to use some parsing method in order to determine the
value of a specific column of data.

No, you can access the individual columns by going:

DataReader("ColumnName") OR DataReader(ColumnIndex)

I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load
and loop thru it....

Or just the datatable.

Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and
return the value of a column name I specifiy ?

Take a closer look at DataReader and DataSets ;-)

[PFC Sadr]

sorry life used to be much much simpler

now you've got to have a seperate connection per datareader; you can't
reuse a connection for really anything-- because ADO.net tries to help
out and automagically close any connection _EVER_ for no reason

MS screwed us all with .NET; it is best to stick with VBA until the
new version of Visual Fred comes out soon
I love Access Data Projects more than anything


On Apr 18, 2:11 pm, "Rob" <[e-mail]:

Hi

Remember back in VBA, you could easily create a recordset, loop thru the
rows, and store the values of the columns to variables...

I am not even talking about writing back to the data...

It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which appears to
store a whole row of data into one long string, which I would then have to
use some parsing method in order to determine the value of a specific column
of data.

Or...

I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load and
loop thru it....

Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and return
the value of a column name I specifiy ?

[Rob]

Ahhh, I see...

DataReader("ColumnName") with a ".ToString" added does work fine

Thanks a Bunch !
"Spam Catcher" <sp**********@rogers.comwrote in message
news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0. 1...

"Rob" <ro***@yahoo.comwrote in
news:Ip******************************@comcast.com:

>It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which
appears to store a whole row of data into one long string, which I
would then have to use some parsing method in order to determine the
value of a specific column of data.

No, you can access the individual columns by going:

DataReader("ColumnName") OR DataReader(ColumnIndex)

>I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load
and loop thru it....

Or just the datatable.

>Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and
return the value of a column name I specifiy ?

Take a closer look at DataReader and DataSets ;-)

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Rob,

In my opinion is the DataTable almost 1:1 the recordset.

The first record is by instance
dt.rows(0)
The next record is
dt.rows(current + 1)
The last record is
dt.rows(rows.count -1)

Cor

"Rob" <ro***@yahoo.comschreef in bericht
news:Ip******************************@comcast.com. ..

Hi

Remember back in VBA, you could easily create a recordset, loop thru the
rows, and store the values of the columns to variables...

I am not even talking about writing back to the data...

It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which appears to
store a whole row of data into one long string, which I would then have to
use some parsing method in order to determine the value of a specific
column of data.

Or...

I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load and
loop thru it....

Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and return
the value of a column name I specifiy ?

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Andersson?=]

Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:

Rob,

In my opinion is the DataTable almost 1:1 the recordset.

In my opinion a DataReader is much closer to a Recordset than a
DataTable is.

A DataTable is used for holding the data read from a DataReader, it
doesn't read anything from the database by itself. A Recordset doesn't
contain the data, but reads it from the database, just like a DataReader.

A DataReader is similar to a forward-only Recordset.
A DataTable is similar to a disconnected Recordset.

>
The first record is by instance
dt.rows(0)
The next record is
dt.rows(current + 1)
The last record is
dt.rows(rows.count -1)

Cor

"Rob" <ro***@yahoo.comschreef in bericht
news:Ip******************************@comcast.com. ..

>Hi

Remember back in VBA, you could easily create a recordset, loop thru the
rows, and store the values of the columns to variables...

I am not even talking about writing back to the data...

It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which appears to
store a whole row of data into one long string, which I would then have to
use some parsing method in order to determine the value of a specific
column of data.

Or...

I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load and
loop thru it....

Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and return
the value of a column name I specifiy ?

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Goran,

You are free in your opinion, do you mind if I keep mine?

Cor

"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschreef in bericht
news:eO**************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:

>Rob,

In my opinion is the DataTable almost 1:1 the recordset.

In my opinion a DataReader is much closer to a Recordset than a DataTable
is.

A DataTable is used for holding the data read from a DataReader, it
doesn't read anything from the database by itself. A Recordset doesn't
contain the data, but reads it from the database, just like a DataReader.

A DataReader is similar to a forward-only Recordset.
A DataTable is similar to a disconnected Recordset.

>>
The first record is by instance
dt.rows(0)
The next record is
dt.rows(current + 1)
The last record is
dt.rows(rows.count -1)

Cor

"Rob" <ro***@yahoo.comschreef in bericht
news:Ip******************************@comcast.com ...

>>Hi

Remember back in VBA, you could easily create a recordset, loop thru the
rows, and store the values of the columns to variables...

I am not even talking about writing back to the data...

It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which appears
to store a whole row of data into one long string, which I would then
have to use some parsing method in order to determine the value of a
specific column of data.

Or...

I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load and
loop thru it....

Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and
return the value of a column name I specifiy ?

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com

[PFC Sadr]

yeah... except you _STILL_ can't have multiple active DataReaders on
the same connection... even though Microsoft tried to CON us all into
buying SQL 2005-- so that we could use 'Multiple Active Result Sets'

I call BULLSHIT on microsoft, fix ADO.net it sucks balls compared to
ADO Classic


On Apr 18, 3:11 pm, "Rob" <[e-mail]:

Ahhh, I see...

DataReader("ColumnName") with a ".ToString" added does work fine

Thanks a Bunch !

"Spam Catcher" <[e-mail] in message

news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0. 1...

"Rob" <[e-mail] in
news:Ip******************************@comcast.com:

It looks to me like I can use a forward only "datareader" which
appears to store a whole row of data into one long string, which I
would then have to use some parsing method in order to determine the
value of a specific column of data.

No, you can access the individual columns by going:

DataReader("ColumnName") OR DataReader(ColumnIndex)

I could create a "dataset" which entails building all the required
structures (columns, rows, and tables) and then I still have to load
and loop thru it....

Or just the datatable.

Is there some easier method to simply loop thru a block of data and
return the value of a column name I specifiy ?

Take a closer look at DataReader and DataSets ;-)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Spam Catcher]

PFC Sadr <pf******@hotmail.comwrote in news:1177113537.643695.29650
@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

yeah... except you _STILL_ can't have multiple active DataReaders on
the same connection... even though Microsoft tried to CON us all into
buying SQL 2005-- so that we could use 'Multiple Active Result Sets'

I believe datareaders use a firehose mode to read data, thus only one
reader per connection.

I call BULLSHIT on microsoft, fix ADO.net it sucks balls compared to
ADO Classic

ADO Classic was definately easier to use ... but I don't have any major
complaints with ADO.NET.

[PFC Sadr]

uh

a) you can't leave a connection open
b) you can't have multiple recordsets open on the same connection

I mean.. WHAT A PIECE OF CRAP
I'd rather use ADO, the DAO then ADO.net


On Apr 20, 8:31 pm, Spam Catcher <[e-mail]:

PFC Sadr <[e-mail] in news:1177113537.643695.29650
@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

yeah... except you _STILL_ can't have multiple active DataReaders on
the same connection... even though Microsoft tried to CON us all into
buying SQL 2005-- so that we could use 'Multiple Active Result Sets'

I believe datareaders use a firehose mode to read data, thus only one
reader per connection.

I call BULLSHIT on microsoft, fix ADO.net it sucks balls compared to
ADO Classic

ADO Classic was definately easier to use ... but I don't have any major
complaints with ADO.NET.

[Spam Catcher]

PFC Sadr <pf******@hotmail.comwrote in news:1178577938.496366.103000
@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

a) you can't leave a connection open

Just don't call the connection.close?

b) you can't have multiple recordsets open on the same connection

You can definately have multiple datasets open on a connection.

I mean.. WHAT A PIECE OF CRAP
I'd rather use ADO, the DAO then ADO.net


On Apr 20, 8:31 pm, Spam Catcher <[e-mail]:

>PFC Sadr <[e-mail] in news:1177113537.643695.29650
@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

yeah... except you _STILL_ can't have multiple active DataReaders

on

the same connection... even though Microsoft tried to CON us all

into

buying SQL 2005-- so that we could use 'Multiple Active Result

Sets'

>>
I believe datareaders use a firehose mode to read data, thus only one
reader per connection.

I call BULLSHIT on microsoft, fix ADO.net it sucks balls compared

to

ADO Classic

ADO Classic was definately easier to use ... but I don't have any

major

>complaints with ADO.NET.