|
dev
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Any way to disable "lazy write" in Jet through ADO.NET?I don't think there is a way. There seems to be a black hole of info
about this unless you are using the older ADO technology. If you know, please share...! Dennis Have you tried to use the JRO (Jet Replication Objects) library? I'm also
surprised you can't set this option in the ConnectionString... but then again, I don't recommend using JET for any serious applications--now that there are so many other viable alternatives. -- Show quote____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <DennisW***@cartegraph.com> wrote in message news:1169960144.822391.316380@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com... >I don't think there is a way. There seems to be a black hole of info > about this unless you are using the older ADO technology. > > If you know, please share...! > > Dennis > Heya Bill,
"William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message It is not that surprising since it can't be set within connection string but news:efzBZwxQHHA.4404@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Have you tried to use the JRO (Jet Replication Objects) library? I'm also > surprised you can't set this option in the ConnectionString... later on, after a connection has been estabilished. But yes, I can't see a valid reason for this behaviour either. but then > again, I don't recommend using JET for any serious applications--now that Totaly agree, but what if there are valid reasons to keep running JET...> there are so many other viable alternatives. -- Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ Yes, I just think it's a waste sending good money after bad. It's kinda like
when someone makes a monumental mistake and spends the rest of their career trying to put the broken eggs back together. -- Show quote____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message news:uCz90QyQHHA.1180@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Heya Bill, > > "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message > news:efzBZwxQHHA.4404@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Have you tried to use the JRO (Jet Replication Objects) library? I'm also >> surprised you can't set this option in the ConnectionString... > > It is not that surprising since it can't be set within connection string > but later on, after a connection has been estabilished. But yes, I can't > see a valid reason for this behaviour either. > > but then >> again, I don't recommend using JET for any serious applications--now that >> there are so many other viable alternatives. > > Totaly agree, but what if there are valid reasons to keep running JET... > > -- > Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia] > RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com > Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/ On Jan 28, 4:08 pm, "William \(Bill\) Vaughn"
<billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote: > Yes, I just think it's a waste sending good money after bad. It's kinda like I'm with you in spirit, Bill. But what if it's a legacy database that > when someone makes a monumental mistake and spends the rest of their career > trying to put the broken eggs back together. is going to be written out over time? It's often a reality that it's too costly to rewrite the database and the software components written on it all at once. In this particular case we probably could make the decision to switch over what we have to a direct connect to Express/MDF. But the db is intended for single-user use and the simplicity of Jet is actually quite appealing. We will do that if we have to. Thanks much, Miha and Bill, for sharing your knowledge and toughts. Dennis So, SQL Express might be overkill for your job--but SQL Server Compact
Edition might be just the ticket. It's lighter than JET and faster. It does not share the same security issues and is fairly mature in its implementation. MS is putting significant resources behind it--even building a new replication engine for it (it already has at least two). See my new EBook at www.hitchhikerguides.net. -- Show quote____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book: Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition) and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <DennisW***@cartegraph.com> wrote in message news:1170024365.245822.102490@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 28, 4:08 pm, "William \(Bill\) Vaughn" > <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote: >> Yes, I just think it's a waste sending good money after bad. It's kinda >> like >> when someone makes a monumental mistake and spends the rest of their >> career >> trying to put the broken eggs back together. > > I'm with you in spirit, Bill. But what if it's a legacy database that > is going to be written out over time? It's often a reality that it's > too costly to rewrite the database and the software components written > on it all at once. > > In this particular case we probably could make the decision to switch > over what we have to a direct connect to Express/MDF. But the db is > intended for single-user use and the simplicity of Jet is actually > quite appealing. We will do that if we have to. > > Thanks much, Miha and Bill, for sharing your knowledge and toughts. > > Dennis > |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics