vb.net中Windows应用程序的同步数据库
我有一个用 VB.NET 制作的 Windows 应用程序，它维护一个数据库，并且我有类似的应用程序在许多断开连接的机器上运行，所有机器都有相似的数据库。现在我们有一个要求，来自这些机器的所有数据必须每天上传到中央数据库服务器 MSSQL 上，我们可以在每台机器上有一个互联网连接，供他们上传数据，但我想知道是否存在任何框架哪个可以帮助本地数据与线上数据同步？我看到 Microsoft 的同步框架 所以我有以下问题。
- 这是唯一可用的选项
- SQL Server 2008 之前 Windows 应用程序如何用于同步数据
- SQL Server 2005 是否有任何选项。
i have a windows application made in VB.NET which maintains a database, and i have similar application running across many disconnected machines, all of them have similar databases. Now we have a requirement that all the data from these machines must be uploaded on a central database server MSSQL on a daily basis, we can have an internet connection on each machine for them to upload the data but i wanted to know if any framework exists which can assist in the synchronization of the local data with the online data? i saw Microsoft's Sync Framework so i have the following questions.
- Is that the only option avaialble
- How windows applications used to synchronize data before SQL Server 2008
- Is there any option for SQL Server 2005.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（1）
基本上有 2 个选择：
它们都在 SQL2000、2005 和 2008 以及 Compact 版本上运行得很好。
我还没有使用新发布的同步框架（2.0），但我相信他们做了一些改进，使其更容易设置。除此之外，它运行得很好，但有一些小问题（对我来说可能只在 CE 方面）。
我的合并复制经验证明相当麻烦，而且很难设置，但是从性能（包括内存消耗）的角度看起来要好得多。如果你周围有一个有能力的 SQL 人员，我会首先尝试这个。
这两种解决方案都会进行增量同步，因此开销不会太大。
There are basically 2 choices:
They all work pretty much on SQL2000, 2005 and 2008, as well as Compact edition.
I have not used the new released (2.0) of the Sync Framework, but I believe they have made a few improvements to make it easier to set up. Else, it works quite well, with a few little issues (perhaps only on the CE side for me).
My experience with merge replication has proved to be quite troublesome, and it is difficult to set up, but from a performance (including memory consumption) point of view looks much better. If you have a capable SQL person around, I would attempt this first.
Both these solutions will do incremental synchronization so the overhead is not so much.