By Mike Rogers - 3/14/2008
I was wondering if anybody has used CoreLabs MySql control with StrataFrame. Mike
|
By Trent L. Taylor - 3/14/2008
At present we do not have a MySQL provider out of the box...however, this is actually a provider that we have been considering adding to the framework. Ironically there is very little demand for MySQL since SQL Server 2005 Express was released. Though this is still on our slate of potential providers to add to the framework out of the box. Most developers going with SQL Server since it is generally a bit more stable and has better overall performance...but I know that there are still some web people out there that like to use MySQL.
|
By Mike Rogers - 3/15/2008
Hi TrentI would like to convert one of our projects using MySql over to StrataFrame. What file would I need to modify. Also the next question is. Will the StrataFrame Business Mapper work the same way as for the MS SQL. Just as a note the Core MySQL .net control works extremly well, and fast. As you said for web, mysql is cheaper with the host providers.
|
By Trent L. Taylor - 3/15/2008
What file would I need to modify. This is not a quick answer really. You would need to create a DataSourceItem that inherits from the DbDataSourceItem class. The best thing would be to copy over the SqlDataSourceItem and start from there. That would be the closest data source to MySQL. Then you will just have to start tweaking it until it is ready for MySQL. Will the StrataFrame Business Mapper work the same way as for the MS SQL. No. You would have to connect using the OLEDB provider for the time being, which by the way, is also a way to talk to MySQL right now without creating a custom data source item. Adding the native implementation into the BO Mapper like the DDT, SQL Server, Oracle, and DB2 will require a change by us to make this work. Like I said before, I think that it is likely that we will create a MySql data source item, but I cannot give you an exact date of when this will happen.
|
By Chan - 5/23/2008
hi,
Any update on mySQL datasourceitem?
Thank you
|
By Trent L. Taylor - 5/26/2008
Not yet...there is such little demand a number of other items are higher up on the list (i.e. DDT enhancements, new BO Mapper and BO Mapper enhancments, etc.). We will still more than likely create one but to be honest, there are fewer and fewer demands (which were small to begin with) for MySQL. I think that many developers have moved over to SQL Server Express. However, we know that there are still developers who want to use MySQL and still have this on our list.
|
By Edhy Rijo - 2/9/2010
Hi Trent,
How realistic would it be to see SF support for MySQL?
I like MS-SQLExpress but being realistic it is by far much harder to support, install and maintain on customer's computers.
For big clients this may no be an issue, but for small clients and small projects it could be a real pain to automate the install of MS-SQL2008 Express, no to mention the hardware requirements for MS-SQL versus MySQL.
I have an application running on Visual FoxPro which I have been wanting to port to SF, but the customers using this application have very low end hardware, some of them with just 256 MB RAM and being honest the application does not requires more than that, but I have not make the final decision to port this application because SF (DDT/BOM/RBS) does not support MySQL which would be the best database for this project.
I understand that fully supporting MySQL would required some changes and a lot of test, but I also believe that if you market SF support for MySQL you would get more customers.
|
By Edhy Rijo - 2/9/2010
Forgot to mention, would you be willing to do a Poll to see how many current SF users would like to see support for MySQL?
|
By Greg McGuffey - 2/9/2010
I wonder if another possible solution might be to create a plug-in architecture for the BO mapper, so users could add support for other databases/data sources. We can already add DataSourceItems, why not the same concept for the code that generates the designer files, either via an interface or a base class?
Just an idea.... 
|
By Russell Scott Brown - 2/9/2010
I am very interested and in need of MySQL support too.I agree with what Edhy said about SQL Express too. If possible, I would VERY much like to use VistaDB (www.VistaDB.net) for the types of Visual FoxPro applications that Edhy is talking about. I have over 350 VFP laptop users that I want/really need to convert to Strataframe and an SQL database but I don't really want to use SQL Express for all the same reasons Edhy mentioned. I keep them in VFP for now but I have to bite the bullet and get them off VFP this year for sure. I will use SQL Express though if necessary. I am seriously considering using VistaDB because I think it is the ideal replacement for low-end clients like Edhy mentioned and extremely easy to install and maintain - much easier than a VFP client for that matter and it is pretty easy. If not VistaDB than some other embedded SQL database. VistaDB is really growing and improving all the time and is 100% MS SQL server compatible. It is also very inexpensive and recommended by Les Pinter, etc. Please put my vote in for MySQL Server and VistaDB. I think others should check out VistaDB and let me know what they think too. I have some big corporate clients this year who I will use SQL Express for but I hate the huge download size (300MB or more) and the complexities versus using VistaDB or VFP, etc. I will make it work but and embedded SQL database engine like VistaDB is even better than VFP or SQL Server Express I think. I would already be using VistaDB if I wasn't so extremely busy and under pressure to meet deadlines and just trying to survice as a startup with limited resources. Thanks for your consideration. I really love Strataframe and want to use it for 100% of everything I do.
|
By Edhy Rijo - 2/9/2010
Hi Russell,
VistaDB looks very interesting but one thing I did not like it is that is a file share database, which means that each application instance needs to open the file database in order to access it, pretty much like VFP and I am not sure I want to go back to that kind of database.
On the other hand I did like all other features, specially their compatibility with MS-SQL which mean that it would probably be easier to implement in SF and our applications to switch from VistaDB to MS-SQL with less code change impact.
What I like about MySQL is that it is a real SQL database,portable and lightweight, reliable, and it can also be embedded and it is available in almost every hosting ISP at a very affordable price for everybody.
I have an application using MS-SQL Express and found out that one of the process needed will be importing thousands of records (sometimes 400,000+) and that those records should be keep in the database for comparison with new imports, that hits me very hard, because now the database file is growing up pretty fast and the only option would be to buy the MS-SQL Standard license and it was just unexpected and that would be the case for almost any customer using this application and that could hurt any possible sale. MySQL is very well suited to handle this application requirements but since it is not supported by SF/DDT/BOM/RBS then it would be very hard for me to manage and I use all SF tools in all applications.
|
By Russell Scott Brown - 2/9/2010
I agree with what you said about both VistaDB and MySQL. I am primarily worried about all the auditors who use my product on their laptops. They never share anything and there is no need for them to do anything on a server. They are strictly remote users who always upload their data (via SMTP now). I take their data and upload it into SQL Server. Right now because the numbers are relatively low with mostly longtime experienced users I can just barely handle everything but that will change as the year goes by. I also have a fair number of churches (21 now but growing rapidly this year (I hope anyway ) using another of my VFP products. I definitely don't want to use SQL Server Express for them either. I am really going to be pushing the church product this year now that I am self-employed and can do whatever I want just time permitting. All the churches using it now install it on a single PC, typically the pastor's or church secretary, and they don't care about multi-user capability. It already supports it though in VFP I just have not yet run into any church doing it that way but I know it will happen. My goal is to have over 100 churches by year-end. I didn't even know you could use MySQL as an embedded DB like you can with VistaDB. I will have to check into it. Definitely that sounds even better than VistaDB then all things considered. Thanks For the server side of things for corporate clients I currently use SQL Server but would definitely like to look into using MySQL. Even more so if I have the clients using MySQL.
|
By Trent L. Taylor - 2/9/2010
Thought I would go ahead and jump in here. Edhy (and Greg) it is funny that you bring up MySQL as this database is already on slate to make it into the framework. It doesn't come up often, but it is a common database that should be native in the framework. I cannot give you any exact dates on this, but it should not be too difficult to implement and is something that we plan on doing.
Greg, I also liked your idea about add-in tools in the BO Mapper. We are going to do a major overhaul of the BO Mapper and when we do we will take this into consideration. Thanks guys!
|
By Edhy Rijo - 2/9/2010
Trent L. Taylor (02/09/2010)
... I cannot give you any exact dates on this, but it should not be too difficult to implement and is something that we plan on doing.
Trent, that is a great news  I am ready for a very early beta, don't need all the features supported or the DDT just yet, but at least the BOM and SF connectivity to start up.
The project I have that will fit perfectly for MySQL is about 35% done, so if you are willing to start an early beta, please consider me to start testing.
|
By Trent L. Taylor - 2/9/2010
As soon as we have something you will be the first to know.
|
By Russell Scott Brown - 2/9/2010
If possible I would still like to have support for VistaDB.I checked into licensing for the MySQL Embedded Database Engine and it is cost prohibitive (for me anyway). They require an upfront deposit about 40 times the upfront cost of VistaDB. VistaDB is also a one-time cost that doesn't depend on the number of users. Thanks for your consideration.
|
By Trent L. Taylor - 2/9/2010
Thanks, Russell. We will take this into consideration.
|