Retrieving @@Identity value in ado.net
in [General]
|
Prev: Switchboard in Access 2010
Next: SendObject format
From: Banana on 15 Mar 2010 23:03 John wrote: > Tried, no luck. Could it be that db is access 97? I am reasonably sure I > tried something similar with access 2000 db in the past and it worked. Aha. If I'm not mistaken, 97 uses Jet 3.5. Hence, no support for @@Identity. You have to use Jet 4.0 (e.g. Access 2000). BTW, so you know, it is possible to use Jet 4.0 without Access to go with it. I'm not sure if you still can download Jet 4.0 as a part of MDAC but if you can, well, you can do that and thus get the most current functionality. HTH.
From: Mark Rae [MVP] on 16 Mar 2010 07:38 "Banana" <Banana(a)Republic> wrote in message news:4B9EF51E.2080107(a)Republic... > BTW, so you know, it is possible to use Jet 4.0 without Access to go with > it. Yes indeed. Many people even now still don't know the difference... Every version of Access apart from 2007 is now out of mainstream support: http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/default.aspx?sort=PN&alpha=Access&Filter=FilterNO > I'm not sure if you still can download Jet 4.0 as a part of MDAC http://support.microsoft.com/kb/271908 -- Mark Rae ASP.NET MVP http://www.markrae.net
From: Banana on 16 Mar 2010 11:01 Mark Rae [MVP] wrote: > Yes indeed. Many people even now still don't know the difference... > > Every version of Access apart from 2007 is now out of mainstream support: > http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/default.aspx?sort=PN&alpha=Access&Filter=FilterNO Fascinating. I kind of expected anything before 2003 to be out of mainstream support, but not 2003 as well which seem to be out of mainstream since last year approximately. I don't have anything to back it up but I'd wager that there are still more 2003 users than there are 2007 users, hence my surprise. > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/271908 Also, FWIW, 2007 is when they forked Jet into ACE. Jet is considered to be 'deprecated' from the MDAC and has been for long time. There's even more enhancements to the engine coming 2010. I'm not so sure whether it's still viable as a standalone engine for say, light use websites as was popularly done with classic ASP + Jet, though. I say that mainly because I believe you now can't get ACE without Access as you could with Jet without Access, but I could be wrong on that point. It's possible that either SQL Server Compact Edition or SQL Server Express Edition will be a better choice for ASP.NET, especially that they have native ADO.NET providers.
From: Mark Rae [MVP] on 16 Mar 2010 11:31 "Banana" <Banana(a)Republic> wrote in message news:4B9F9D5C.8020004(a)Republic... >> Every version of Access apart from 2007 is now out of mainstream support: >> http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/default.aspx?sort=PN&alpha=Access&Filter=FilterNO > > Fascinating. I kind of expected anything before 2003 to be out of > mainstream support, but not 2003 as well which seem to be out of > mainstream since last year approximately. Correct. > I don't have anything to back it up but I'd wager that there are still > more 2003 users than there are 2007 users, hence my surprise. No idea either... > Also, FWIW, 2007 is when they forked Jet into ACE. Jet is considered to be > 'deprecated' from the MDAC and has been for long time. There's even more > enhancements to the engine coming 2010. I'm not so sure whether it's still > viable as a standalone engine for say, light use websites IMO, Jet has *never* been a viable RDBMS for websites, no matter how small. It's simply not designed for that scenario... > It's possible that either SQL Server Compact Edition or SQL Server Express > Edition will be a better choice for ASP.NET, especially that they have > native ADO.NET providers. SQL Server Express, definitely. SqlCe isn't officially supported for use in disconnected environments like ASP.NET: http://www.zorched.net/2007/01/17/using-sql-compact-edition-under-aspnet/ -- Mark Rae ASP.NET MVP http://www.markrae.net
From: Banana on 16 Mar 2010 11:37
Mark Rae [MVP] wrote: > IMO, Jet has *never* been a viable RDBMS for websites, no matter how > small. It's simply not designed for that scenario... Interesting. I never actually tried to use Jet as a backend for a website, mainly because I build database applications, not web applications. I only went off from what seemed to be high numbers of articles instructing how to set up Jet with classic ASP. I wasn't too clear on the rationale, but I think it had to do with that back then it was a choice between Jet or MSDE. I don't know. > SQL Server Express, definitely. > > SqlCe isn't officially supported for use in disconnected environments > like ASP.NET: > http://www.zorched.net/2007/01/17/using-sql-compact-edition-under-aspnet/ Cool. Good to know and thanks for sharing. |