Dumb question - MSSql - what is the front end?

Hello there.
If I am developing an application that I want to use MSSQL 2000 Server as
the back end (Which I get as part of SBS 2003) what is the actual front end
to a MS SQL database?
I know Access is an option, but I am of the understanding that some people
say this is geared towards smaller applications.
I also know one can go away and develop a specific VB application that uses
a MSSQL server.
But if someone is going away to develop a database in MSSQL, what is the
assumed front end to make the actual forms for someone to use that database?
Would ASP.net be a modern front end?
Forgive me if this question is stupid.
Thanks
DaveWell, strictly speaking, in many current projects your browser (eg,
Internet Explorer) is your "front end", and asp.net is your
middleware.
But you're free to use Access, or to use VB.net or C# to create rich
or smart clients that go directly to SQLServer, plus or minus your own
middleware web services written as VB/C# components, then your rich
clients are smart clients. Or write Python command line or GUI apps,
or J2EE Jakarta/Struts or Atlast/Ajax, or Excel VBA, SQLServer is
happy in any case.
Josh
On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 00:39:50 GMT, "David Smithz"
<dave1900@.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>Hello there.
>If I am developing an application that I want to use MSSQL 2000 Server as
>the back end (Which I get as part of SBS 2003) what is the actual front end
>to a MS SQL database?
>I know Access is an option, but I am of the understanding that some people
>say this is geared towards smaller applications.
>I also know one can go away and develop a specific VB application that uses
>a MSSQL server.
>But if someone is going away to develop a database in MSSQL, what is the
>assumed front end to make the actual forms for someone to use that database?
>Would ASP.net be a modern front end?
>Forgive me if this question is stupid.
>Thanks
>Dave
>|||Sqlserver is just a data store. Sure, you can develop a front-end (client
app) with vb/vb.net/c#/etc. to connect to sqlserver for data. If you're
going to develop something, you might as well use the current technology.
Asp.net is just a name for a web application written in .net. There's really
no difference in data access between a web app-to-sql and a typical client
app-to-sql.
Here is a link to some info that should get you started.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/learning/learn/newtodevelopment/
-oj
"David Smithz" <dave1900@.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:qlKhg.82685$wl.15748@.text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Hello there.
> If I am developing an application that I want to use MSSQL 2000 Server as
> the back end (Which I get as part of SBS 2003) what is the actual front
> end to a MS SQL database?
> I know Access is an option, but I am of the understanding that some people
> say this is geared towards smaller applications.
> I also know one can go away and develop a specific VB application that
> uses a MSSQL server.
> But if someone is going away to develop a database in MSSQL, what is the
> assumed front end to make the actual forms for someone to use that
> database?
> Would ASP.net be a modern front end?
> Forgive me if this question is stupid.
> Thanks
> Dave
>|||"oj" <nospam_ojngo@.home.com> wrote in message
news:uw2Z6bpiGHA.4912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Sqlserver is just a data store. Sure, you can develop a front-end (client
> app) with vb/vb.net/c#/etc. to connect to sqlserver for data. If you're
> going to develop something, you might as well use the current technology.
> Asp.net is just a name for a web application written in .net. There's
> really no difference in data access between a web app-to-sql and a typical
> client app-to-sql.
> Here is a link to some info that should get you started.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/learning/learn/newtodevelopment/
OK thanks for that.
As an example, if someone came to you and said,
"I need to develop a database for my business. It will have about 10 users
(but 5 most of the time) and it must work quickly. I heard Java is good but
you know better then me".
Other details I know are although web access would be useful at times,
generally the database needs to run on the internal network primarily (or
anyway connected to the network via VPN)
Considering they have an installation of SBS 2003 (which I believe comes
with MS SQL 2000) what (as an example) would your answer to be to the
question.
Thanks for any input which will just help me to see if I am thinking along
the right lines compared to others with experience in this field (i.e. you
guys ;) )
Dave|||David Smithz wrote:
> "oj" <nospam_ojngo@.home.com> wrote in message
> news:uw2Z6bpiGHA.4912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Sqlserver is just a data store. Sure, you can develop a front-end (client
>> app) with vb/vb.net/c#/etc. to connect to sqlserver for data. If you're
>> going to develop something, you might as well use the current technology.
>> Asp.net is just a name for a web application written in .net. There's
>> really no difference in data access between a web app-to-sql and a typical
>> client app-to-sql.
>> Here is a link to some info that should get you started.
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/learning/learn/newtodevelopment/
> OK thanks for that.
> As an example, if someone came to you and said,
> "I need to develop a database for my business. It will have about 10 users
> (but 5 most of the time) and it must work quickly. I heard Java is good but
> you know better then me".
> Other details I know are although web access would be useful at times,
> generally the database needs to run on the internal network primarily (or
> anyway connected to the network via VPN)
> Considering they have an installation of SBS 2003 (which I believe comes
> with MS SQL 2000) what (as an example) would your answer to be to the
> question.
> Thanks for any input which will just help me to see if I am thinking along
> the right lines compared to others with experience in this field (i.e. you
> guys ;) )
> Dave
>
Hi Dave
I'm not a programmer, but I think your question is better asked in a
programmer/developer forum. As already mentioned, SQL server just holds
the data and doesn't really care much about which program gets the data.
SQL server will just handle the request that comes from your application
and then do what's being requested. If these requests comes from a
program written in .net, C## or whatever doesn't really matter.
--
Regards
Steen Schlüter Persson
DBA

Dumb question - MSSql - what is the front end?

Hello there.
If I am developing an application that I want to use MSSQL 2000 Server as
the back end (Which I get as part of SBS 2003) what is the actual front end
to a MS SQL database?
I know Access is an option, but I am of the understanding that some people
say this is geared towards smaller applications.
I also know one can go away and develop a specific VB application that uses
a MSSQL server.
But if someone is going away to develop a database in MSSQL, what is the
assumed front end to make the actual forms for someone to use that database?
Would ASP.net be a modern front end?
Forgive me if this question is stupid.
Thanks
DaveWell, strictly speaking, in many current projects your browser (eg,
Internet Explorer) is your "front end", and asp.net is your
middleware.
But you're free to use Access, or to use VB.net or C# to create rich
or smart clients that go directly to SQLServer, plus or minus your own
middleware web services written as VB/C# components, then your rich
clients are smart clients. Or write Python command line or GUI apps,
or J2EE Jakarta/Struts or Atlast/Ajax, or Excel VBA, SQLServer is
happy in any case.
Josh
On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 00:39:50 GMT, "David Smithz"
<dave1900@.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>Hello there.
>If I am developing an application that I want to use MSSQL 2000 Server as
>the back end (Which I get as part of SBS 2003) what is the actual front end
>to a MS SQL database?
>I know Access is an option, but I am of the understanding that some people
>say this is geared towards smaller applications.
>I also know one can go away and develop a specific VB application that uses
>a MSSQL server.
>But if someone is going away to develop a database in MSSQL, what is the
>assumed front end to make the actual forms for someone to use that database
?
>Would ASP.net be a modern front end?
>Forgive me if this question is stupid.
>Thanks
>Dave
>|||Sqlserver is just a data store. Sure, you can develop a front-end (client
app) with vb/vb.net/c#/etc. to connect to sqlserver for data. If you're
going to develop something, you might as well use the current technology.
Asp.net is just a name for a web application written in .net. There's really
no difference in data access between a web app-to-sql and a typical client
app-to-sql.
Here is a link to some info that should get you started.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/l...wtodevelopment/
-oj
"David Smithz" <dave1900@.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:qlKhg.82685$wl.15748@.text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Hello there.
> If I am developing an application that I want to use MSSQL 2000 Server as
> the back end (Which I get as part of SBS 2003) what is the actual front
> end to a MS SQL database?
> I know Access is an option, but I am of the understanding that some people
> say this is geared towards smaller applications.
> I also know one can go away and develop a specific VB application that
> uses a MSSQL server.
> But if someone is going away to develop a database in MSSQL, what is the
> assumed front end to make the actual forms for someone to use that
> database?
> Would ASP.net be a modern front end?
> Forgive me if this question is stupid.
> Thanks
> Dave
>|||"oj" <nospam_ojngo@.home.com> wrote in message
news:uw2Z6bpiGHA.4912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Sqlserver is just a data store. Sure, you can develop a front-end (client
> app) with vb/vb.net/c#/etc. to connect to sqlserver for data. If you're
> going to develop something, you might as well use the current technology.
> Asp.net is just a name for a web application written in .net. There's
> really no difference in data access between a web app-to-sql and a typical
> client app-to-sql.
> Here is a link to some info that should get you started.
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/l...wtodevelopment/
OK thanks for that.
As an example, if someone came to you and said,
"I need to develop a database for my business. It will have about 10 users
(but 5 most of the time) and it must work quickly. I heard Java is good but
you know better then me".
Other details I know are although web access would be useful at times,
generally the database needs to run on the internal network primarily (or
anyway connected to the network via VPN)
Considering they have an installation of SBS 2003 (which I believe comes
with MS SQL 2000) what (as an example) would your answer to be to the
question.
Thanks for any input which will just help me to see if I am thinking along
the right lines compared to others with experience in this field (i.e. you
guys ;) )
Dave|||David Smithz wrote:
> "oj" <nospam_ojngo@.home.com> wrote in message
> news:uw2Z6bpiGHA.4912@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> OK thanks for that.
> As an example, if someone came to you and said,
> "I need to develop a database for my business. It will have about 10 users
> (but 5 most of the time) and it must work quickly. I heard Java is good bu
t
> you know better then me".
> Other details I know are although web access would be useful at times,
> generally the database needs to run on the internal network primarily (or
> anyway connected to the network via VPN)
> Considering they have an installation of SBS 2003 (which I believe comes
> with MS SQL 2000) what (as an example) would your answer to be to the
> question.
> Thanks for any input which will just help me to see if I am thinking along
> the right lines compared to others with experience in this field (i.e. you
> guys ;) )
> Dave
>
Hi Dave
I'm not a programmer, but I think your question is better asked in a
programmer/developer forum. As already mentioned, SQL server just holds
the data and doesn't really care much about which program gets the data.
SQL server will just handle the request that comes from your application
and then do what's being requested. If these requests comes from a
program written in .net, C## or whatever doesn't really matter.
Regards
Steen Schlter Persson
DBA

Dumb permissions question

Hi
I'm running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 SBS server. Much to my
horror I notice that that the SQL data directory has permissions set
for:
Domain\Administrator (full accesss)
Domain\Administrators (full accesss)
Authenticated users (read,list, read). I guess this isn't a good idea
at all!
What are the optimum permissions here (I can't seem to get a straight
answer). Do I set it for the SQL service to have full control only (at
the moment MSSQLSERVER service is logging on using
Domain\Administrator). Do I change this account? What about the other
SQL Server related services? Please also note I am also using Backup
Exec 9 to backup the databases.
Any suggestions you may have will be greatly appreciated!
Many thanks
Alex<postings@.alexshirley.com> wrote in message
news:1133285607.162678.51170@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> I'm running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 SBS server. Much to my
> horror I notice that that the SQL data directory has permissions set
> for:
> Domain\Administrator (full accesss)
> Domain\Administrators (full accesss)
> Authenticated users (read,list, read). I guess this isn't a good idea
> at all!
> What are the optimum permissions here (I can't seem to get a straight
> answer). Do I set it for the SQL service to have full control only (at
> the moment MSSQLSERVER service is logging on using
> Domain\Administrator). Do I change this account? What about the other
> SQL Server related services? Please also note I am also using Backup
> Exec 9 to backup the databases.
> Any suggestions you may have will be greatly appreciated!
> Many thanks
> Alex
On my SQL Server 2000 database running on Windows 2003 standard server, the
permissions on the SQL data directory are just for Domain\Administrators,
full access. The MSSQLServer service is set to use the local system account.
If your authenticated users have access then you should be able to revoke
that without problem.
I don't know where Backup Exec fits into the picture - I don't use it - but
it shouldn't be backing up the files directly so it shouldn't need any
permissions on the folder.
Hope this is useful.
--
Brian Cryer
www.cryer.co.uk/brian|||Great, thanks for your help Brian...!
Alex
-->
Brian Cryer wrote:

> <postings@.alexshirley.com> wrote in message
> news:1133285607.162678.51170@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> On my SQL Server 2000 database running on Windows 2003 standard server, th
e
> permissions on the SQL data directory are just for Domain\Administrators,
> full access. The MSSQLServer service is set to use the local system accoun
t.
> If your authenticated users have access then you should be able to revoke
> that without problem.
> I don't know where Backup Exec fits into the picture - I don't use it - bu
t
> it shouldn't be backing up the files directly so it shouldn't need any
> permissions on the folder.
> Hope this is useful.
> --
> Brian Cryer
> www.cryer.co.uk/brian

Dumb permissions question

Hi
I'm running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 SBS server. Much to my
horror I notice that that the SQL data directory has permissions set
for:
Domain\Administrator (full accesss)
Domain\Administrators (full accesss)
Authenticated users (read,list, read). I guess this isn't a good idea
at all!
What are the optimum permissions here (I can't seem to get a straight
answer). Do I set it for the SQL service to have full control only (at
the moment MSSQLSERVER service is logging on using
Domain\Administrator). Do I change this account? What about the other
SQL Server related services? Please also note I am also using Backup
Exec 9 to backup the databases.
Any suggestions you may have will be greatly appreciated!
Many thanks
Alex
<postings@.alexshirley.com> wrote in message
news:1133285607.162678.51170@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> Hi
> I'm running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 SBS server. Much to my
> horror I notice that that the SQL data directory has permissions set
> for:
> Domain\Administrator (full accesss)
> Domain\Administrators (full accesss)
> Authenticated users (read,list, read). I guess this isn't a good idea
> at all!
> What are the optimum permissions here (I can't seem to get a straight
> answer). Do I set it for the SQL service to have full control only (at
> the moment MSSQLSERVER service is logging on using
> Domain\Administrator). Do I change this account? What about the other
> SQL Server related services? Please also note I am also using Backup
> Exec 9 to backup the databases.
> Any suggestions you may have will be greatly appreciated!
> Many thanks
> Alex
On my SQL Server 2000 database running on Windows 2003 standard server, the
permissions on the SQL data directory are just for Domain\Administrators,
full access. The MSSQLServer service is set to use the local system account.
If your authenticated users have access then you should be able to revoke
that without problem.
I don't know where Backup Exec fits into the picture - I don't use it - but
it shouldn't be backing up the files directly so it shouldn't need any
permissions on the folder.
Hope this is useful.
Brian Cryer
www.cryer.co.uk/brian
|||Great, thanks for your help Brian...!
Alex
-->
Brian Cryer wrote:

> <postings@.alexshirley.com> wrote in message
> news:1133285607.162678.51170@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> On my SQL Server 2000 database running on Windows 2003 standard server, the
> permissions on the SQL data directory are just for Domain\Administrators,
> full access. The MSSQLServer service is set to use the local system account.
> If your authenticated users have access then you should be able to revoke
> that without problem.
> I don't know where Backup Exec fits into the picture - I don't use it - but
> it shouldn't be backing up the files directly so it shouldn't need any
> permissions on the folder.
> Hope this is useful.
> --
> Brian Cryer
> www.cryer.co.uk/brian

Dumb permissions question

Hi
I'm running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 SBS server. Much to my
horror I notice that that the SQL data directory has permissions set
for:
Domain\Administrator (full accesss)
Domain\Administrators (full accesss)
Authenticated users (read,list, read). I guess this isn't a good idea
at all!
What are the optimum permissions here (I can't seem to get a straight
answer). Do I set it for the SQL service to have full control only (at
the moment MSSQLSERVER service is logging on using
Domain\Administrator). Do I change this account? What about the other
SQL Server related services? Please also note I am also using Backup
Exec 9 to backup the databases.
Any suggestions you may have will be greatly appreciated!
Many thanks
Alex<postings@.alexshirley.com> wrote in message
news:1133285607.162678.51170@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> I'm running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 SBS server. Much to my
> horror I notice that that the SQL data directory has permissions set
> for:
> Domain\Administrator (full accesss)
> Domain\Administrators (full accesss)
> Authenticated users (read,list, read). I guess this isn't a good idea
> at all!
> What are the optimum permissions here (I can't seem to get a straight
> answer). Do I set it for the SQL service to have full control only (at
> the moment MSSQLSERVER service is logging on using
> Domain\Administrator). Do I change this account? What about the other
> SQL Server related services? Please also note I am also using Backup
> Exec 9 to backup the databases.
> Any suggestions you may have will be greatly appreciated!
> Many thanks
> Alex
On my SQL Server 2000 database running on Windows 2003 standard server, the
permissions on the SQL data directory are just for Domain\Administrators,
full access. The MSSQLServer service is set to use the local system account.
If your authenticated users have access then you should be able to revoke
that without problem.
I don't know where Backup Exec fits into the picture - I don't use it - but
it shouldn't be backing up the files directly so it shouldn't need any
permissions on the folder.
Hope this is useful.
--
Brian Cryer
www.cryer.co.uk/brian|||Great, thanks for your help Brian...!
Alex
-->
Brian Cryer wrote:
> <postings@.alexshirley.com> wrote in message
> news:1133285607.162678.51170@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm running SQL Server 2000 on a Windows 2003 SBS server. Much to my
> > horror I notice that that the SQL data directory has permissions set
> > for:
> > Domain\Administrator (full accesss)
> > Domain\Administrators (full accesss)
> > Authenticated users (read,list, read). I guess this isn't a good idea
> > at all!
> >
> > What are the optimum permissions here (I can't seem to get a straight
> > answer). Do I set it for the SQL service to have full control only (at
> > the moment MSSQLSERVER service is logging on using
> > Domain\Administrator). Do I change this account? What about the other
> > SQL Server related services? Please also note I am also using Backup
> > Exec 9 to backup the databases.
> >
> > Any suggestions you may have will be greatly appreciated!
> >
> > Many thanks
> >
> > Alex
> On my SQL Server 2000 database running on Windows 2003 standard server, the
> permissions on the SQL data directory are just for Domain\Administrators,
> full access. The MSSQLServer service is set to use the local system account.
> If your authenticated users have access then you should be able to revoke
> that without problem.
> I don't know where Backup Exec fits into the picture - I don't use it - but
> it shouldn't be backing up the files directly so it shouldn't need any
> permissions on the folder.
> Hope this is useful.
> --
> Brian Cryer
> www.cryer.co.uk/brian