Low-overhead database to use with .NET 1.1?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Dathon - 07 Jan 2006 00:03 GMT

I have a product (running on .NET 1.1) that needs to maintain a local
database on the machine it's installed on. I want something with extremely
low resource overhead (i.e. no SQL Server, no MSDE). It needs to be quick
with inserts and selects. It also can not be a memory hog.

I am currently using an XML file for this purpose, but I have found that
using XMLDataDocument and strongly-typed DataSet incurs a huge memory
overhead. What's more, in order to write changes to the DB, the entire XML
document needs to be rewritten. This is not acceptable given that I could
have as many as 500K rows and do frequent updates to rows.

Any recommendations?

Reply to this Message

Mark Rae - 07 Jan 2006 00:05 GMT

> Any recommendations?

Jet.

Reply to this Message

Chris Priede - 07 Jan 2006 21:32 GMT

> Any recommendations?

SQLite.

Signature

Chris Priede

Reply to this Message

john smith - 07 Jan 2006 22:30 GMT

>> Any recommendations?
>
> SQLite.

I second that, and I would definitely avoid JET.
Have a peek at that article:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/20051119.asp

Reply to this Message

Kevin Yu [MSFT] - 09 Jan 2006 02:01 GMT

Hi,

IMO, Using an XML file to be a database that is frequently written to is
not a good idea. Generally, I will suggest using MSDE. It has good
performance in database insert and update. Since you don't want to use it,
you can try an Access file and using Jet to manipulate it.

Kevin Yu

Signature

=======
"This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights."

Reply to this Message

john smith - 09 Jan 2006 02:23 GMT

> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> "This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights."

Well, why recommend MSDE instead of SQL Server Express, and especially
since he said in his post that either were unsuitable? Jet is even worse
of a suggestion IMHO. SQLite is FAR better than Jet for this purpose -
much faster, less overhead, less dependencies (MDAC and such), none of
the usual jet issues (doesn't scale, files that grow and then break once
you try "compress and repair", corrupted files, etc etc).

Reply to this Message

Kevin Yu [MSFT] - 10 Jan 2006 02:44 GMT

Hi,

My brain is still in the world of SQL Server 2000. :-)

Yes, like john smith mentioned, SQL Server Express is a better choice.

Kevin Yu

Signature

=======
"This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights."

Reply to this Message

Dathon - 14 Jan 2006 20:06 GMT

Thanks for all the suggestions. If I'm not mistaken SQL Server Express
requires .NET 2.0. I think it's a great system, but I'm concerned with the
impact on users... ("Please wait while we install SQL Server on your
laptop..."). :-)

> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> "This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights."

Reply to this Message

Low-overhead database to use with .NET 1.1?

Free Magazines