[dba-Tech] Linq

Arthur Fuller fuller.artful at gmail.com
Sun Jan 8 12:27:29 CST 2012

Thanks for the guidance, guys! I shall plod on, in my semi-retirement
shrinking-grasp mode. Centimeter by centimeter, as it were, but as the
snail said, "It's Progress."


On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Gustav Brock <gustav at cactus.dk> wrote:

> Hi Arthur
> And don't forget LINQPad:
> http://www.linqpad.net/
> It's even free but for a small amount you can buy the Pro version with
> autocompletion and more.
> /gustav
> >>> df.waters at comcast.net 08-01-2012 17:12 >>>
> Hi Arthur,
> LINQ is a Microsoft BIG DEAL!  It's NOT being deprecated.
> What you may have read is that Linq-to-SQL is being deprecated - also not
> true.  A few years ago MS apparently said something that was misinterpreted
> as LtS being deprecated in favor of Linq-to-Entities, and that sparked a
> rumor which hasn't died yet.
> In a very broad definition LINQ replaces recordsets.
> LTS and LTE are similar concepts.  Each provides a way to avoid using lots
> of connection and command code to update the underlying database.  The
> broad
> difference is that LtS works only with Sql Server, while LtE works with any
> database.  As you might guess, LtS is simpler and faster.  If you're
> defining your own tables in Sql Server it's the right path to take.  With
> any other BE, you'll need LtE.  LtE can make developer life easier because
> you can avoid 'impedance mismatch' between the data fields and types in the
> BE, and what the FE really wants to have (I don't know much about LtE).
>  But
> you won't have that if you're designing your own tables.  LtE is also more
> complex than LtS, and I've read where some shops have deemed it too
> problematic and have stopped using it.
> Another thing you may hear is that LtS and LtE are slow.  I've read both,
> but the consensus is that if you're operating on large numbers of records,
> you may want to do some comparison testing to see if it's fast enough.  For
> example, in my system when I initially opened a form and pulled over all
> the
> table records from BE to FE across a WAN (~ 16K records), the form took
> about 30 seconds to open.  But when I rewrote it so that only one record at
> a time came across, there was no opening lag.  I didn't compare to opening
> an ADO recordset with 16K records so I don't have a comparison.
> Do some searches on 'Learning LINQ', 'Learning Linq to SQL', etc., and
> you'll have reading for a week.
> Good Luck!
> Dan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Arthur Fuller
> Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 9:41 AM
> To: Discussion of Hardware and Software issues
> Subject: [dba-Tech] Linq
> I'm learning C# 2010 and part of that concerns Linq. I thought I'd read
> something about Linq being deprecated. Am I mistaken? Am I wasting my time
> learning that part?
> --
> Arthur
> Cell: 647.710.1314
> _______________________________________________
> dba-Tech mailing list
> dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com

Cell: 647.710.1314

Prediction is difficult, especially of the future.
  -- Werner Heisenberg

More information about the dba-Tech mailing list