A good Database Alternative to Access & SqlServer Express?

[Noble]

I am getting ready to write a shareware app in .Net using C# (actually
convert a VB shareware). I currently use a third party dll for the
data management. It is called the Tsunami Record Manager. I know that
it will not work in C# so I am looking for a very light-weight
database system that will work well in C#. I really don't want to use
Access if I can help it and Sql Server Express is really overkill.
Does anyone have any suggestions?

nb

 

[Moty Michaely]

I am getting ready to write a shareware app in .Net using C# (actually
convert a VB shareware). I currently use a third party dll for the
data management. It is called the Tsunami Record Manager. I know that
it will not work in C# so I am looking for a very light-weight
database system that will work well in C#. I really don't want to use
Access if I can help it and Sql Server Express is really overkill.
Does anyone have any suggestions?

nb

Dear Noble,

You can use SQLite, a zero-configuration SQL database engine.

SQLite project site:
http://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html

Code Project sample:
http://www.codeproject.com/useritems/SQLite_GUI.asp

Good Luck!
Moty

 

[Mark Rae]

Does anyone have any suggestions?

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/compact/default.mspx

 

[Larry Smith]

I am getting ready to write a shareware app in .Net using C# (actually

convert a VB shareware). I currently use a third party dll for the
data management. It is called the Tsunami Record Manager. I know that
it will not work in C# so I am looking for a very light-weight
database system that will work well in C#. I really don't want to use
Access if I can help it and Sql Server Express is really overkill.
Does anyone have any suggestions?

What does "light-weight" mean here. Due to the nature of RDBMSs and what
they offer, I think you'll find any mainstream DB package sufficiently
weighted-down so that it's potentially unsuitable for your needs (depending
on what they are of course). If you do find something that's apparently
satisfactory, you'll also have to consider its dependablity as well. Is it
stable and reliable. Free or public domain packages are also potentially
risky simply because their backers might not be around in a couple of years
(and they could be operating out of the back of a truck for all you know).
What about just using a simple "DataSet" as-is. I'm doing exactly that for
my own app and it's perfectly fine. There are no fancy bells and whistles
such as transaction support but you get a fairly decent DB engine already
built-in for free. For projects with minimal DB requirements it works very
well and costs nothing.

 

[Moty Michaely]

What does "light-weight" mean here. Due to the nature of RDBMSs and what
they offer, I think you'll find any mainstream DB package sufficiently
weighted-down so that it's potentially unsuitable for your needs (depending
on what they are of course). If you do find something that's apparently
satisfactory, you'll also have to consider its dependablity as well. Is it
stable and reliable. Free or public domain packages are also potentially
risky simply because their backers might not be around in a couple of years
(and they could be operating out of the back of a truck for all you know).
What about just using a simple "DataSet" as-is. I'm doing exactly that for
my own app and it's perfectly fine. There are no fancy bells and whistles
such as transaction support but you get a fairly decent DB engine already
built-in for free. For projects with minimal DB requirements it works very
well and costs nothing.

Larry, You are absolutely right, he should take all these into
account.

About public domain applications: I am not sure they are not more
stable than any other products. It's true that their originators will
probably not be there in the future.
But it doesn't mean anything about the quality of the product (See all
GNU license products).
Public domain or GNU products are very powerful, especially for free
ware applications. We should take them into account.

I didn't mention SQL Server Compact since I recall it was restricted
to Windows Mobile platforms only. Now it's not anymore.

Therefor, I think Mark is right. for the purpose of compact, .NET
based applications, SQL Server compact is the best solution.

"SQL Server Compact is a free, easy-to-use, lightweight, and
embeddable version of SQL Server 2005 for developing desktop and
mobile applications."

I think that's the best choice for you, Noble. just as Mark directed.

 

[Noble]

I will take a look at all those. Thanks everyone for your insight.
nb

 

[Samuel R. Neff]

Discounting ALL free or public domain software due to the risk of
backers not being around is overkill. Especially since that risk
exists both with free and commercial software. Many companies build
products and then don't sell well and the products go away. That's
the same with free and commercial.

Also you have the problem with large commercial products that they
will be around but will drastically change the product forcing you to
do a lot of extra work. Countless examples of this.

SQLite is a wonderful database that has been around for about 8 years
and is used by some huge companies including Apple, Adobe, Firefox,
GE, Google.

For use in a .NET 2.0 app be sure to check out the SQLite ADO.NET
provider:

http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com/

Also if you really do have a concern about SQLite not being around,
the primary author does sell commercial licenses for SQLite which
provide support and a guarantee.

Sam

------------------------------------------------------------
We're hiring! B-Line Medical is seeking .NET
Developers for exciting positions in medical product
development in MD/DC. Work with a variety of technologies
in a relaxed team environment. See ads on Dice.com.