|
web
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
XML or SQL Server?starting to use SQL Server to hold the data, but I'm wondering if a database is overkill. I might store a few thousand recipes maximum, so I'm wondering if I should use XML instead. My question is: is XML acceptible for this type of storage? The actions performed include reading recipes, editing recipes and adding to them. Deleting them, searching within them, etc. There are 2 tables only, a Recipe table and Category table. The fields used in the Recipe table are recipe name (varchar 100), recipe description (text), date created, date modified, etc. The category table includes categories used (Italian, etc). It's a very simple database. If I use XML, am I correct that I would have to load everything into memory...into a dataset and then traverse through that? If so, since I might have thousands of recipes, I might use a couple of megabytes maximum of RAM, I would imagine. Is XML only memory-based? Is there a way to grab only the bits of data I need as I need them? The most important component of the product is the GUI. The fact that I need a data storage mechanism is secondary. The front end, ease of use, is most important, so I'm trying to figure out what is best for it. Is it acceptable to load a couple of megs of data into memory for my application? Perhaps that is not so much of an issue in 2006, where 512MB of ram is the new minimum standard? Any suggestions or advice would be great. mrMagoo,
At this moment there is in my opinion aspecially with new application no better alternative for SQLExpress. You have well described the problems with XML, extra to that is that they can easily unwanted be deleted or wrong versions overwritten, while with a write error you loose everything if you don't protect that. http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/sql/download/ http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms365247.aspx I hope this helps, Cor Show quoteHide quote "mrmagoo" <-> schreef in bericht news:eYRIyvVnGHA.4240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Hi. I'm writing a Windows Forms VB.Net app that is a recipe keeper. I am > starting to use SQL Server to hold the data, but I'm wondering if a > database > is overkill. I might store a few thousand recipes maximum, so I'm > wondering > if I should use XML instead. > > My question is: is XML acceptible for this type of storage? The actions > performed include reading recipes, editing recipes and adding to them. > Deleting them, searching within them, etc. > > There are 2 tables only, a Recipe table and Category table. > > The fields used in the Recipe table are recipe name (varchar 100), recipe > description (text), date created, date modified, etc. The category table > includes categories used (Italian, etc). > > It's a very simple database. > > If I use XML, am I correct that I would have to load everything into > memory...into a dataset and then traverse through that? > > If so, since I might have thousands of recipes, I might use a couple of > megabytes maximum of RAM, I would imagine. Is XML only memory-based? Is > there a way to grab only the bits of data I need as I need them? > > The most important component of the product is the GUI. The fact that I > need > a data storage mechanism is secondary. The front end, ease of use, is most > important, so I'm trying to figure out what is best for it. Is it > acceptable > to load a couple of megs of data into memory for my application? Perhaps > that is not so much of an issue in 2006, where 512MB of ram is the new > minimum standard? > > Any suggestions or advice would be great. > > A suggestion of sorts...design structure I guess...
Include at least to more tables ... - Directions ... How to Cook the item. - Ingredients...What is needed to cook the item... So, this would give you three core tables... Recipe Header Recipe Directions Recipe Ingredients... This design would make your 'Header' table light wait - you would only include 'lookup' and 'identification' information ... and allow users to include as much detailed as they like without impacting search / lookup / load performance. I would recommend using a database of some sort ... it will be easier in the end to maintain and upgrade. What happens when you change or add new features to you applicaiton that require 'additional' fields in existing tables or additional tables ... you will need to write an update procedure that will update all the current xml documents to ensure they will load in to the GUI ... however, with a database ... simple. Also, have you considered using a MSAccess datafile for this ... XML files are great for temporary storage but should not be used to 'replace' the functionality of a database... As you build a relational data model ... you need to be able to leverage the efficiencies and functional of a database ....even for simple 'two table' applications (because a two table application can easily grow to 3, 4, 5, 10 tables ... and the technology you choose now will impact your ability to scale the application later...). Show quoteHide quote "mrmagoo" <-> wrote in message news:eYRIyvVnGHA.4240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Hi. I'm writing a Windows Forms VB.Net app that is a recipe keeper. I am > starting to use SQL Server to hold the data, but I'm wondering if a > database > is overkill. I might store a few thousand recipes maximum, so I'm > wondering > if I should use XML instead. > > My question is: is XML acceptible for this type of storage? The actions > performed include reading recipes, editing recipes and adding to them. > Deleting them, searching within them, etc. > > There are 2 tables only, a Recipe table and Category table. > > The fields used in the Recipe table are recipe name (varchar 100), recipe > description (text), date created, date modified, etc. The category table > includes categories used (Italian, etc). > > It's a very simple database. > > If I use XML, am I correct that I would have to load everything into > memory...into a dataset and then traverse through that? > > If so, since I might have thousands of recipes, I might use a couple of > megabytes maximum of RAM, I would imagine. Is XML only memory-based? Is > there a way to grab only the bits of data I need as I need them? > > The most important component of the product is the GUI. The fact that I > need > a data storage mechanism is secondary. The front end, ease of use, is most > important, so I'm trying to figure out what is best for it. Is it > acceptable > to load a couple of megs of data into memory for my application? Perhaps > that is not so much of an issue in 2006, where 512MB of ram is the new > minimum standard? > > Any suggestions or advice would be great. > > thanks for the input guys.
Show quoteHide quote "mrmagoo" <-> wrote in message news:eYRIyvVnGHA.4240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Hi. I'm writing a Windows Forms VB.Net app that is a recipe keeper. I am > starting to use SQL Server to hold the data, but I'm wondering if a database > is overkill. I might store a few thousand recipes maximum, so I'm wondering > if I should use XML instead. > > My question is: is XML acceptible for this type of storage? The actions > performed include reading recipes, editing recipes and adding to them. > Deleting them, searching within them, etc. > > There are 2 tables only, a Recipe table and Category table. > > The fields used in the Recipe table are recipe name (varchar 100), recipe > description (text), date created, date modified, etc. The category table > includes categories used (Italian, etc). > > It's a very simple database. > > If I use XML, am I correct that I would have to load everything into > memory...into a dataset and then traverse through that? > > If so, since I might have thousands of recipes, I might use a couple of > megabytes maximum of RAM, I would imagine. Is XML only memory-based? Is > there a way to grab only the bits of data I need as I need them? > > The most important component of the product is the GUI. The fact that I need > a data storage mechanism is secondary. The front end, ease of use, is most > important, so I'm trying to figure out what is best for it. Is it acceptable > to load a couple of megs of data into memory for my application? Perhaps > that is not so much of an issue in 2006, where 512MB of ram is the new > minimum standard? > > Any suggestions or advice would be great. > > |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics