Wow..this is turning out to be a very interesting thread..thanks for all contributions.

I would add that  this customer, although an existing customer, the reps app has not been signed off on yet, so to some degree, a bit theoretical. However, I do have to give the guy figures, and though the main app on the notebook wont go above 4 gigs, they do want to be able to access company wide information which easily could go over the 4 Gigs. I need to have the figures, if we start off with Sql Express, and then end up with Edhy's scenario where the database goes over 4 gigs one day....we'll all be in  a dilly of a pickle then !!!!

The next day.... the company may need to fork out 15 X $1,800 = $27,000...not a pretty picture

Is there another database out there which is truly 100% comapatbale with Sql Server......if it was 100% compatable , should it not then be a matter of changing a connection string and bobs your uncle ??..The App or Sf should not even be aware of a change  if it is truly 100% compaible ??

I use SF with MySQL, I had to write my own MySQLDataSourceItem but it works fine and has been for several years, although the application is a simple website application.

I also wrote a custom DataSourceItem to work with SQL Compact, not that this is a solution here but illustrates that with a little work you can make SF work with what you want.

The only trouble I ever had using SF with using a database other than SQL Server was with DB2, which I dont suggest anyone try unless you have a DB2 DBA around.

So there are options,  but I am pretty sure Trent posted that MySQL support was to be added soon in SF !!??

Keith Chisarik

Hi Keith,



The application which I would like to use MySQL is a smart client and currently its VFP version is installed at more than 100 customers and the majority with a very low end hardware, some will even have Windows 2000 with 256 MB RAM. It is just impossible for me to even try to install a SF version with MS-SQL Express on that kind of hardware and the reality is that this particular application is sold in a range of US$500.00 - US$650.00 and this kind of customers will only replace the hardware if it is broken. So in reality I have to keep the application in VFP for now until I find a way to use SF applications under this kind of environment.



Also I will need the DDT functionality in order to update MySQL structures at the customers site when releasing updates, if you know a way for me to do this with MySQL or VistaDB please let me know so I can start testing.





Yes, the question is when will that happen? AFAIK I am not aware of an SF roadmap posted for us to plan ahead for upcoming updates.

Edhy Rijo

We definitely need VistaDB support!

I have the same requirement.  Lots of remote users who usually cannot access the server while doing audits at a client location.

VFP has worked fine for me so far but SQL Express is too big and overkill with updates and security headaches, etc., if you have too many road warriors/laptop users like I do.

I'm going to start checking into using VistaDB with SF starting the first week in May (I'm traveling the next 2 weeks).  They offer a free 30 day trial and it is only $450 for the professional version anyway so very reasonable.  The combination of SF and VistaDB would be perfect I think.

Anyway, a $450 investment in VistaDB could save a fortune in SQL Service CALs. 

Russ Brown (Using C#2010/SQL Server 2008)

I also forgot to mention that I checked into licensing MySQL Embedded DB and found that it was cost prohibitive.  It was about $20,000 upfront just to get 100 licenses.  The price per license starts dropping after that but they don't offer any pay per license as you go along so that killed it for me.

If you distribute it with a commercial application you have to have a license.  If you give your application away free then there is no problem.

Other than that though MySQL Embedded DB looked very good but I'm going to give VistaDB a try mainly for financial reasons.  I'm hoping others will jump on VistaDB too once I start using it the first week in May.

VistaDB would for well without SF too of course but I want to us SF for everything if possible.

Russ Brown (Using C#2010/SQL Server 2008)

Interesting comparison: VistaDB vs. SQL Server Express

http://www.vistadb.net/compare/sql-server-express.aspx

Russ Brown (Using C#2010/SQL Server 2008)

Hi Russ,



I will be testing VistaDB pretty soon too. In the next week or two I will be upgrading to Window 7 64bits, VS2010 and after moving my SF projects to VS2010 I will focus on VistaDB since I have the need to move the VFP application to SF and so far VistaDB looks like the best candidate for this application, even though I also have a couple of customers with several branch offices in which the same application will have to use MS-SQL Express or whatever version they need, so in this application I must be able to switch databases and still I am not clear how that could be accomplish in SF? Would I have to create a business object per target database?

Edhy Rijo

Sounds like you will definitely get to VistaDB before I do it sounds like.  I'm pretty excited about it.  I am also interested in MySQL for sure. 

I'm not sure about having a BO for each database, VistaDB or MySQL.

I would recommend contacting VistaDB and Jason via their forum (they have a free section for developers to ask question before buying).

Also, I've sent e-mails directly to Jason at VistaDB and he has always gotton right back to me.

Russ Brown (Using C#2010/SQL Server 2008)

I forgot to reply about the Windows 7 part and VS 2010 of your post.  I've recently downloaded the beta of VS 2010 and Office 2010 but haven't even installed them yet.  When I do it will be on a Sun Virtual Machine (http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads) I have setup with Windows 7, XP, Vista, etc.  This avoids having to setup a separate PC or laptop and works surprisingly well.  I've not had any problems.

I haven't installed SF on the Virtual Box though.  I just test the applications on it.

Russ Brown (Using C#2010/SQL Server 2008)