Thursday, March 22, 2012

Database files (VS 2005) - usage?

I'm just getting to grips with the new SQL Database file concept in VS 2005
and have a couple of questions in the hope that someone can clarify my
understanding.
I understand that I can now add both the <dbname>.mdf and <dbname>.ldf files
traditionally associated with a SQL Server into my application folder, and
that these are attached to SQL Express at runtime. I see this an ideal
replacement for an Access database on single user desktop applications,
leveraging the power of a SQL Server whilst offering the advantages of a
file-based db like Access (x-copy backups for example).
However, for a small multi-user system (say 5 users), am I right in thinking
that the database is now shared and therefore the database files need to be
available to all users on a network share? It seems obvious, but then does
each user attach these shared files to their local SQL Express, or is there
one application / SQL Express nominated as the 'server' with the remaining
applications running in a pure 'client' mode? And if the latter, how is the
connection string managed?
Am I barking up the wrong tree with this?
CheersAndrew Kidd wrote:
> However, for a small multi-user system (say 5 users), am I right in thinki
ng
> that the database is now shared and therefore the database files need to b
e
> available to all users on a network share?
No. The database files just need to be visible to the server. In fact
it's probably a good idea to make sure that user's can't see the
network share where the database resides.

> It seems obvious, but then does
> each user attach these shared files to their local SQL Express, or is ther
e
> one application / SQL Express nominated as the 'server' with the remaining
> applications running in a pure 'client' mode? And if the latter, how is th
e
> connection string managed?
>
One server. Multiple clients. The clients don't need Express they just
need SQL Server connectivity: Native Client or MDAC.
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||Thanks David.
"David Portas" <REMOVE_BEFORE_REPLYING_dportas@.acm.org> wrote in message
news:1133528080.622239.309940@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Andrew Kidd wrote:
> No. The database files just need to be visible to the server. In fact
> it's probably a good idea to make sure that user's can't see the
> network share where the database resides.
>
> One server. Multiple clients. The clients don't need Express they just
> need SQL Server connectivity: Native Client or MDAC.
> --
> David Portas
> SQL Server MVP
> --
>|||When would a department, with say only 5 users and < 2GB of data, want to
move from using SQL Server Express to Workgroup Edition?
"David Portas" <REMOVE_BEFORE_REPLYING_dportas@.acm.org> wrote in message
news:1133528080.622239.309940@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Andrew Kidd wrote:
> No. The database files just need to be visible to the server. In fact
> it's probably a good idea to make sure that user's can't see the
> network share where the database resides.
>
> One server. Multiple clients. The clients don't need Express they just
> need SQL Server connectivity: Native Client or MDAC.
> --
> David Portas
> SQL Server MVP
> --
>|||JT wrote:
> When would a department, with say only 5 users and < 2GB of data, want to
> move from using SQL Server Express to Workgroup Edition?
>
When they need the scalability or functionality of one of the other
editions:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...e-features.mspx
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--

No comments:

Post a Comment