Instead of using elfinder to browse files. Can I use elfinder to browse Items from database like MySQL.
I'm working on MVC.net
Thanks
Not with elFinder, no, but you can use other open source tools such as Adminer, which works very nicely. Adminer requires PHP.
https://www.adminer.org/
Note this is for general overall DBA tasks for the person running the site, if your aim is to provide limited access to update and retrieve things out of MySQL for end-users usually people code this up themselves, half the web is app servers querying MySQL for stuff.
I have an .sql script that contains inserts and creates tables. I used the "Create EER Model From Script"
It created the tables but I can't see the data inside these tables.
I went to the query menu and tried to make a query but it gives me an error about not being able to connect to localhost.
Am I doing it right?
As documented under Create EER Model from SQL Script:
Clicking this action item launches the Reverse Engineer SQL Script wizard. This is a multi-stage wizard that enables you to select the script you want to create your model from.
For further information, see Section 7.7.9.1, “Reverse Engineering Using a Create Script”.
Following that link:
However, if you are working with a script that also contains DML statements you need not remove them; they will be ignored.
Instead, you want the Manage Data Import/Export option under Server Administration (within the Workspace section of the Home window).
You are confusing things here. Creating a model from a script is a process where meta data is examined and a model is created that you can then use to modify your schema structure, further design your db objects and all that. Modeling is a design process for the structure of your schema/db so it only deals with meta data. It's also used for documentation (e.g. in teams).
On the other hand there's normal sql work with existing db objects and/or actually creating/deleting/modifying db objects. In order to do the latter you must have an understanding of the design of the schema (which you could get by using the modeling part of MySQL Workbench, but not only by that). This is also the place to load a script, run it to insert data and such.
The error you mentioned regarding the connection is yet another problem and you need to solve this first to be able to even access your server. And yes, you have to install a server first somewhere. MySQL Workbench is a tool to visually work with your server(s) in opposition to the MySQL command line client which is a pure text interface (but still also a client application for your MySQL servers).
If you are on Windows and want a MySQL server installed locally (e.g. for testing) your best option is to download the MySQL Installer which greatly simplifies installing any of the tools from the MySQL family (server, client tools, connectors, documentation and more).
I am planning an enterprise deployment with SiteCore 6.5....
I am thinking to have one instance of CMS (WebAuthoring) and several servers as Content Delivery...
I was thinking to replicate the Core Database between the Content Delivery and the WebAuthoring instances... and I was not able to understand the role of the LinkDatabase... Do I need the linkdatabase on the Content Delivery?!
I was also considering an alternative scenario without the CORE database for the content delivery, in this case, I should put the LinkDatabase on the web database, shall I have in place a procedure to rebuild the LinkDatabase or it is completely useless in a content delivery scenario??? I really cannot understand from the documentation the purpose of the link database and the API that use it.
pls let me know your opinion and thoughts about it.
From what I can tell you don't have to have a LinkDatabase on content delivery nodes. It is however quite handy as it is one of the fastest ways to get a list of references and/or referrers for a specific item.
You can point the LinkdDatabase at the web database and Sitecore will automatically keep it updated for you as described in section 3.6.1 of the Scaling Guide:
You can use the Sitecore link database API to access all the items
that are referenced by or refer to a specific Sitecore item.
All the link database information is stored in the Core database by
default, and aggregates data for the items from every Sitecore content
database.
You configure the location of the link database in the web.config in
the Link Database section file in the connectionStringName parameter:
<!-- LINK DATABASE -->
<LinkDatabase type="Sitecore.Data.$(database).$(database)LinkDatabase, Sitecore.Kernel">
<param connectionStringName="core" />
</LinkDatabase>
In a single-server Sitecore setup, the link database is automatically
updated.
In a multi-server Sitecore setup, the link database is only
automatically updated for databases that are referenced from the CM
environment.
To ensure that Sitecore automatically updates the link database in the
CD environment:
The CD and CM instances must use the same name to refer to the publishing target database across the environments (typically Web).
One of the following conditions should be met:
The Core database should be shared or replicated between the CM and CD instances.
The Link database data should be configured to be stored in a database which is shared between CM and CD publishing target database
(typically Web).
If you want to remove the core database from the content delivery nodes there is a section called 'Remove the Core database from the content delivery environment' in the Configuring Production Environments(PDF) document.
The Link database keeps track of relations between items, such as item <-> template relations. It's required for Sitecore and possibly for your custom components so they can do fast lookups for those kind of relations.
If the databases are not physically on a different machine, i would just go for a shared Core db where all the servers use the same core.
If they are on different machines, then go for a seperate Core with SQL replication.
The scenario without Core is possible, but not recommended because it's more difficult to setup and to maintain.
I'm working with another dev and together we're building out a MySQL database. We've each got our own local instances of MySQL 5.1 on our dev machines. We've not yet been able to identify a way for us to be able to make a local schema change (eg: add a field and some values for that field) and then export some kind of script or diff file that the other can import in. I've looked into Toad and Navicat's synchronization features but they seem oriented towards synchronizing between two instances, not an instance and an intermediate file. We thought MySQL Workbench would be great but this but the synchronization feature just seems plain broken. Any other ideas? How do you collaborate with others on the schema?
First of all put your final SQL schema into version control. So you'll always have a version of it with all changes. It can be a plain SQL file. Every developer in the team can use it as starting point to created his copy database. All changes must be applied to it. This will help you to find conflicts faster.
Also I used such file to create a test database to run unit-tests after each submit. So we were always sure that production code is working.
Then you can use any migration tool to move changed between developers. Here is similar question about this:
Mechanisms for tracking DB schema changes
If you're using PHP then look at Doctrine migrations.
Would you recommend working with multiple programmers on an MS Access application?
One of our MS Access application has grown to the point where the number of changes (bug fixes) and new features can no longer be handled by one programmer in the requested time frame.
We are trying to introduce version control using the undocumented SaveAsText and LoadFromText procedures in VBA to make collaboration on this application possible. Unfortunately we have already run into problems loading modified forms and reports back into Access as a checksum is stored in every form text file.
Before putting time into building an import/export application to compile text files into an Access database, we would like to hear your recommendations.
I think you should avoid this path at all cost, and try and persuade management into redevelopment.
It's a bitter pill to swallow, but this is going to need to be redeveloped sooner or later, and you are just saving them time and money.
We were using Microsoft's own version control add-in for MS Access 2000/2002/2003 for about 5 years now, and I can't remember a single serious problem. Usability of this add-in barely deserves a "B", but it must be much, much more convenient than fiddling with any ad-hoc method involving manual or semi-manual exporting/importing of Access forms, modules, etc.
We were using VSS as a version control system all the time. No problems whatsoever. However, if you have some good reasons to avoid VSS, you may have some options:
The version control add-in that we were using does not require VSS. Theoretically it can be used with any version control system that implements Microsoft Source Code Control Interface (MSCCI). For example, when we had to let somebody work on this project remotely, we used SourceOffsite by SourceGear. Access version control add-in worked with this third-party product fairly well (not without some quirks, but well enough). So, if your favorite version control system complies with MSCCI, you could try to use it.
Now that Microsoft has this Team Foundation thingy, apparently there are other options to be used to integrate MS Access with version control. We did not explore this path, though. This article may be a good start for exploring it.
Hope this would be of some help. :-)
P.S. I am not a big fan of MS Access. In fact, I rather hate it as a platform for a user front-end. If I had a choice, I would run away from it yesterday. :-) However, I must admit that existence of this version control add-in is one of the few things that makes maintenance of our old Access+SQLServer project more or less tolerable. :-))
In addition to what I already said here, I should add that the whole system works very well. The comparison process takes less than 30 minutes a week, for a team of 3 programmers. So let's describe it a little bit.
We have basically 2 versions of our Access program:
The "Developer's version", with all the stuff in it.
We each begin to work with an identical version of our developer's edition. As each one modifies or add parts of the code, we have to run some comparison routine on a regular basis. To do so, we have an object-export routine to a common "comparison" folder. An object (module for example) is exported as a text file (saveAsText command, do not work with tables, see infra), it will be compared to the existing equivalent text files in the folder. If files are identical, there is no file exported. If files are different, the new module is exported with the developer's name as an addition to the file name (if modQueries.txt exists, then modQueries_philippe.txt is created...). Of course if there is no equivalent .txt file in the folder, it will be created at first export.
At the end of the period, we would get in our folder the following files
modQueries.txt, being the first "original", last common version of the module
modQueries_Philippe.txt, with Philippe's modifications
modQueries_Denise.txt, with Denise's modifications
As the module was not modified by other developers, their export did not lead to the creation of a specific modQueries_developersName.txt file
If for any reasons Denise exported many times her module, only the last version is in the comparison folder.
We can then compare (with a "text file" comparer) the different versions and create the "updated" version of the module. We have a screen giving us the number of objects in the comparison folder, number of version for each object, and it is even possible to open the file comparer directly from the developer's interface (We use "File Compare Tool" which has a command-line mode and can then be started directly from Access).
The forms compare issue is quite special, as one of our rules is to have no specific code in our forms (please see here for more details). Forms are then only for display, so usually we do not even compare them. We just make sure that each one of them is updated by only one person (which is quite logical).
The table compare issue (we have local tables) can be only made between mdb files. As we export one text file per module, we also export one mdb file per table. We have a small routine allowing us to identify table differences at the structure level or at the record level.
After each comparison procedure, a subroutine will use all the objects available ini the comparison folder and create a whole new clean mdb file from scratch. This is the new developer's version. Every developer can then copy it on his computer and continue his work.
Developer's versions do not have numbers, but contains last client version number.
The client version, with limited stuff, automatically distributed to users
Each developer has the possibility to build a "client" mdb for final users. This mdb is created from scratch, in a way quite similar to our developer's version, but not all objects are exported. Some specific switches are turned off (special keys, access to code, etc). This mdb holds a version number as a property. The version number is used to build the name of the mdb file.
At production time, this mdb file is zipped and placed in a specific "distribution" folder. Each time a user starts the app, it will automatically check this folder to see if a new version is available. If yes, the client mdb file is updated from the distribution folder, and the app is restarted.
This distribution folder is replicated at night time with our overseas agencies. Users abroad will then be able to install the new version on the following day.
Following the direction provided by Yarik we settled on continuing developing in Access using the Access Add-in Source Code Control, the SVN SCC API Plugin by PushOk Software and Subversion. This stack provides us with seamless Access integration, full-backup and restore and an open version control system.
We had to install a hotfix to Access 2003 and make sure the default database file type matched our database file type to make it work.
We will continue to update this answer with our findings.
Have look at this thread:
How do you use version control with Access development?
Sounds like a terribly painful way to do team development. If you have any options for porting to another environment like VS2008 that would be my recommendation.
There is no easy way to work on Access as a team and even version control might be a bit tricky.