Home > Archive > SQL Server Programming > February 2005 > Seek method, table-direct, and sql server2005
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Seek method, table-direct, and sql server2005
|
|
| Manuel Lopez 2005-02-23, 9:00 am |
| From what I've read in the docs, ado.net currently supports opening sql
server ce tables in table-direct mode and performing S operations on them
(using SqlCeDataReader), but not on the full-blown sql server. Is this
(will this be) still true with ado.net 2.0 & sql server 2005?
| |
| Erland Sommarskog 2005-02-23, 9:00 pm |
| Manuel Lopez (manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com) writes:
> From what I've read in the docs, ado.net currently supports opening sql
> server ce tables in table-direct mode and performing S operations on
> them (using SqlCeDataReader), but not on the full-blown sql server. Is
> this (will this be) still true with ado.net 2.0 & sql server 2005?
I looked the MSDN for the VS 2005 beta, and there is no S method
for the SqlDataReader.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Darren Shaffer 2005-02-24, 4:03 pm |
| I'm doing a CF2.0, SQLMobile app right now and using S. It *is*
supported and works well.
The documentation is probably just not up to date yet.
--
Darren Shaffer
Principal Architect
Connected Innovation
"Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message
news:Xns9606F31BE3124Yazorman@127.0.0.1...
> Manuel Lopez (manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com) writes:
>
> I looked the MSDN for the VS 2005 beta, and there is no S method
> for the SqlDataReader.
>
>
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
>
> Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Erland Sommarskog 2005-02-24, 9:00 pm |
| Darren Shaffer (darrenshaffer@discussions.microsoft.com) writes:
> I'm doing a CF2.0, SQLMobile app right now and using S. It *is*
> supported and works well.
> The documentation is probably just not up to date yet.
And you use SqlDataReader and not SqlCeDataReader with SQL Mobile? (The
original poster asked for S in SqlDataReader when talking to
SQL2005 non-Mobile.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Darren Shaffer 2005-02-24, 9:00 pm |
| apologies - read the orig post too quickly and assumed he was asking about
SQLMobile.
--
Darren Shaffer
Principal Architect
Connected Innovation
"Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message
news:Xns9607EB690F7BBYazorman@127.0.0.1...
> Darren Shaffer (darrenshaffer@discussions.microsoft.com) writes:
>
> And you use SqlDataReader and not SqlCeDataReader with SQL Mobile? (The
> original poster asked for S in SqlDataReader when talking to
> SQL2005 non-Mobile.
>
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
>
> Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Manuel Lopez 2005-02-24, 9:00 pm |
| I don't mind using SqlCeDataReader, but I assume there's no way to get it to
work with sql server (except the ce version). On the other hand, perhaps
that's wrong? are there really two diffferent file formats for sql server,
ce and non-ce? if not, couldn't the ce version conceivably be used against
regular sql server?
"Darren Shaffer" <darrenshaffer@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eYaiJnsGFHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> apologies - read the orig post too quickly and assumed he was asking about
> SQLMobile.
> --
> Darren Shaffer
> Principal Architect
> Connected Innovation
>
> "Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message
> news:Xns9607EB690F7BBYazorman@127.0.0.1...
>
>
| |
| Erland Sommarskog 2005-02-25, 9:00 am |
| Manuel Lopez (manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com) writes:
> I don't mind using SqlCeDataReader, but I assume there's no way to get
> it to work with sql server (except the ce version). On the other hand,
> perhaps that's wrong? are there really two diffferent file formats for
> sql server, ce and non-ce? if not, couldn't the ce version conceivably
> be used against regular sql server?
I don't know much about SQL Server CE/Mobile, but as I understood it from
a discussion about the OLE DB provider for SQL Server CE, that provider
really pokes around in the files - that is SQL Server CE is not a server
at all.
With the real SQL Server you communicate over some network protocol, and
the data provider never directly accesses the files. From this reason,
a S method makes less sense with SQL Server non-CE.
There are also interesting syntax differences between the two. For instance
in the real SQL Server you cannot use ALTER TABLE to add the IDENTITY
property to a column. This feature which is often asked for is available
in SQL Server CE!
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Manuel Lopez 2005-02-25, 4:03 pm |
| The fact that the ce provider accesses the sql server files directly, rather
than use a network protocol, is actually a plus for me, since I use sql
server only as a local database (desktop database). As I understand it,
you're saying the file formats are the same, so then conceivably it could be
made to work against sql server (though there are probably other obstacles,
and perhaps the eula prevents trying).
"Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message
news:Xns96086178AF30EYazorman@127.0.0.1...
> Manuel Lopez (manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com) writes:
>
> I don't know much about SQL Server CE/Mobile, but as I understood it from
> a discussion about the OLE DB provider for SQL Server CE, that provider
> really pokes around in the files - that is SQL Server CE is not a server
> at all.
>
> With the real SQL Server you communicate over some network protocol, and
> the data provider never directly accesses the files. From this reason,
> a S method makes less sense with SQL Server non-CE.
>
> There are also interesting syntax differences between the two. For
> instance
> in the real SQL Server you cannot use ALTER TABLE to add the IDENTITY
> property to a column. This feature which is often asked for is available
> in SQL Server CE!
>
>
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
>
> Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Erland Sommarskog 2005-02-25, 9:01 pm |
| Manuel Lopez (manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com) writes:
> The fact that the ce provider accesses the sql server files directly,
> rather than use a network protocol, is actually a plus for me, since I
> use sql server only as a local database (desktop database). As I
> understand it, you're saying the file formats are the same, so then
> conceivably it could be made to work against sql server (though there
> are probably other obstacles, and perhaps the eula prevents trying).
Did I say the file formats are the same? In such case I take that back.
I don't know anything about the file format of SQL Server CE.
However, I would be very much suprised if they have the same format, since
the databases are accessed in so different ways. The data files in real
SQL Server are accessed by one single executable: sqlsrvr.exe, whereas
several processes could access an SQL Server CE database.
Essentially it seems to be that the two databases are in fact two quite
different architectures, but with an (almost common) interface in T-SQL.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Manuel Lopez 2005-02-26, 3:59 am |
| You hadn't said it, but I wrongly inferred it from your remarks. I'll see
if I can find something from Microsoft on this; but I take it the ce version
is like sql server in the sense of supporting the same query language, but
in other respects it's likely to be an entirely different database.
"Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message
news:Xns9608EE104551Yazorman@127.0.0.1...
> Manuel Lopez (manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com) writes:
>
> Did I say the file formats are the same? In such case I take that back.
> I don't know anything about the file format of SQL Server CE.
>
> However, I would be very much suprised if they have the same format, since
> the databases are accessed in so different ways. The data files in real
> SQL Server are accessed by one single executable: sqlsrvr.exe, whereas
> several processes could access an SQL Server CE database.
>
> Essentially it seems to be that the two databases are in fact two quite
> different architectures, but with an (almost common) interface in T-SQL.
>
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
>
> Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
| |
| Mary Chipman [MSFT] 2005-02-27, 4:03 pm |
| CE is likely closer to Jet internally than to SQL Server. Most of the
original Jet programmers moved over to the SQL team to develop the
product. That being said, I don't actually know much about the
internals of CE vis a vis SQLS other than that factoid :-)
--Mary
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:13:38 -0600, "Manuel Lopez"
<manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com> wrote:
>You hadn't said it, but I wrongly inferred it from your remarks. I'll see
>if I can find something from Microsoft on this; but I take it the ce version
>is like sql server in the sense of supporting the same query language, but
>in other respects it's likely to be an entirely different database.
>
>"Erland Sommarskog" <esquel@sommarskog.se> wrote in message
>news:Xns9608EE104551Yazorman@127.0.0.1...
>
| |
| Manuel Lopez 2005-02-27, 4:03 pm |
| Thanks, that's more than I was able to find out on my own.
"Mary Chipman [MSFT]" <mchip@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:jv142118skbcq1ir1qv5d9quhh62qui7ss@
4ax.com...[color=darkred]
> CE is likely closer to Jet internally than to SQL Server. Most of the
> original Jet programmers moved over to the SQL team to develop the
> product. That being said, I don't actually know much about the
> internals of CE vis a vis SQLS other than that factoid :-)
>
> --Mary
>
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:13:38 -0600, "Manuel Lopez"
> <manuel.email.at.post.harvard.edu@deadspam.com> wrote:
>
|
|
|
|
|