|
We're using WSS / SharePoint Foundation as our development platform. SPF uses SQL Server for storing data (so it still is a RDBMS), although we can't access the DB directly: rather, we use SP's object model or its web services to the point that we don't use any data access technology (such as ADO or LINQ) anymore. So I guess that, in a way, we're moving away from traditional RDBMS.
|
|
|
|
|
Care to say something about the performance overhead compared to working with System.Data.Common.DbDataReader descendants like SqlDataReader ? 500%, 1000%, 10000% ?
I guess you'll find that you are looking at a perfomrance overhead between 500% and 1000%, but I wouldn't surprised if it's far more - state of the art ORM's usually have a performance overhead of about 300% ...
This might be of interest:Performance Benchmarks for SharePoint Lists[^]
This might be of interest too:
http://sqlsrvintegrationsrv.codeplex.com/releases/view/17652[^]
Espen Harlinn
Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services
|
|
|
|
|
Espen Harlinn wrote: This might be of interest:Performance Benchmarks for SharePoint Lists[^]
For years I've been telling everyone who would listen about the negative consequences of performing looping operations in the object model (OM) against large data sets.
That's why in such scenarios you don't do looping operations with the object model, but rather perform a CAML query, as the same article suggests.
However, obviously there is some overhead involved, as is with any platform (i.e. compare .NET against unmanaged code). The thing is that most of the times the benefits of not having to develop a back-end for administrators, of being able to rapidly create web applications with minimal efforts and with a nice customizable UI outweighs the overhead inconveniences. And most of our customers prefer it this way.
Of course, if this overhead becomes an issue for one project, we wouldn't use SharePoint. If performance is indeed critical, we would most likely go with C++ and unmanaged code (this was actually the case with a recently closed project).
So, in conclusion, as long as SharePoint saves our customer's money, and we deliver what they expect, they will still go for it. And we will have to follow.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
I was actually interested in the relative performance, just wondered if you had done anything on this ...
>> If performance is indeed critical, we would most likely go with C++ and unmanaged code
So would I actually ...
>> So, in conclusion, as long as SharePoint saves our customer's money,
>> and we deliver what they expect, they will still go for it. And we will have to follow.
Good and valid points
Regards
Espen Harlinn
Espen Harlinn
Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services
|
|
|
|
|
There is no good alternative to traditional database in fast development, where less data is not in TB's. I think we will remain will SQL.
***** Programme comme si dept soutien technique. est plein de tueurs en série et ils savent adresse de votre domicile. *****
|
|
|
|
|
Does RDBMS stand for:
Request Drinking Before Mind Sleeping?
should we answer "ay", we have no choice but keep it that way!
SkyWalker
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know about that. Most big web apps like Facebook are using NoSQL databases. RDBMS are too slow.
|
|
|
|
|
JPs criteria was for < 1tb, that does not describe big in todays database world.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, actually now that I read a bit more about it Facebook seems to use a combination of different types of database
|
|
|
|
|
We have CListCtrl: why would we need RDBMS?
Unless... Really Delicious BACON Management System? Two slices of bread, some butter, and a little bit of brown sauce? <Slurp! />
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
|
|
|
|
|
I never got the CListCtrl joke [template]... where can I find more about it?
|
|
|
|
|
I could tell you...but then I'd have to kill you.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
|
|
|
|
|
I go for RDBMS with Rapid Application Development.
Systems with Large amount of data and high OLTP operations will require or move to Non-RDBMS solutions.
// ♫ 99 little bugs in the code,
// 99 bugs in the code
// We fix a bug, compile it again
// 101 little bugs in the code ♫
|
|
|
|
|
|
I care to differ on rapid application development point you make, having a table first mind set hinders speed, and has been drummed into us over the decades since the advent of RDBMs. Its just painful for initial development and even more for maintenance work on a deployed application.
The only main reason to go for RDBMs at the moment is if you require millisecond concurrency of all your data. i.e. all your data is valid for a delta time of around a millisecond.
Take a look at me RaptorDB [^]article, its the first step towards a document store database which I'm working on.
Its the man, not the machine - Chuck Yeager
|
|
|
|
|
Good Point!
Reading the Article.
Cheers.
// ♫ 99 little bugs in the code,
// 99 bugs in the code
// We fix a bug, compile it again
// 101 little bugs in the code ♫
|
|
|
|
|
|
thank you, it was very learning and helpful for me.
Avinash S. Godse
|
|
|
|
|
yipee i voted first
modified on Wednesday, June 1, 2011 10:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
and I am the first voter of your Post.
|
|
|
|
|
I have participated in just about every single poll for years but I don't think I have ever made it first. Top ten, yes.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Y is everyone voting me down
I am already 100 points down for this
|
|
|
|
|
|
saxenaabhi6 wrote: Y is everyone voting me down
I am already 100 points down for this
The reason you are being downvoted is because we don't care that you were the first voter.
--
** You don't hire a handyman to build a house, you hire a carpenter.
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
you should have not downvoted if you REALLY don't care
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't down vote you.
--
** You don't hire a handyman to build a house, you hire a carpenter.
** Jack of all trades and master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
Because shouting "First!" is juvenile and retarded.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|