Built an app locally with an EF code-first database - not sure how to upload it to a shared hosting environment such as GoDaddy. It makes sense that something would be amiss because on the shared hosting your code can't just go create a database, but on the flip side I can't find anything to copy the CREATE sql and create it on the server like you would with MySQL
Feel a little silly because I've been using .NET for over a year now but at work the databases are already set up and we have full control over our environments.
If the database has no data that you need to preserve the easiest method is just to install the app on the new host and set the connection string to your new database on the host. On the first attempt to load a page accessing the database, the database will automatically be created (note that you need to load a page which hits the database - sometimes the home page is not sufficient).
This method is a lot more straightforward than generating SQL and then executing it on the production database.
If there is data that you need to preserve then the best method will be taking a backup and installing the backup on the host. In SSMS simply right-click the database in the left pane, then Tools > Backup... To restore on the server connect to the server in SSMS and right-click the 'Database' node in the left panel and select 'Restore Database...' I'm not sure if the host provides a direct connection from SSMS but they should at a minimum have a mechanism to restore a .bak file.
Going forward you should ensure that you can execute SQL on your database as a very convenient method for deploying EF Migrations is to generate the SQL update script on the development server and then deploy this by executing it in production.
Depending on your web host, you may be able to restore the database. If this is an option, simply back up your database on your local machine and restore it on the server via the management console.
You can back up your local database using SQL Server Management Console. This works well even for larger databases as you can directly restore all your data, your schema, etc.
I've had experience with three different hosts so far and all of them have this as an option. You'll usually find this under the Database tab for the web site. The rest from there is up to you because it's usually different across the various hosts.
Related
I am experimenting with several Neo4j databases in my machine. The databases have been generated and populated from Java programs.
Now I would like to inspect them.
It seems that the recommended way is to open the web console so it points to a specific database by means of configuring the property:
org.neo4j.server.database.location=<database location path>
in the neo4j configuration file: conf/neo4j-server.properties
This if fine if I am only interested in one database. But it does not look like a good idea if I am switching often between databases or if I want to explore more than one at the same time.
Is it possible to configure distinct web consoles (maybe using distinct ports) so they refer to my distinct databases?
And is it possible to do this without installing several instances (binaries) of Neo4j in my machine and having to modify lots of configuration files?
Yes! If you edit that same conf/neo4j-server.properties file you can change the org.neo4j.server.webserver.port and org.neo4j.server.webserver.https.port values (I normally set the https port to one less than the http port).
Once you've done that you run ./bin/neo4j start (make sure you shut down your Java app which is accessing the database first) to start the server on that port and then simply visit http://localhost:<port>
I'm not 100% sure if generating the database from Java will generate everything that you need for running a server. If not you can download Neo4j from http://neo4j.com/download/, make multiple copies of it, and replace the graph.db folder with yours one (make sure you shut down any processes which are accessing those databases before copying the directory). Also if you've downloaded a newer version you might need to set allow_store_upgrade=true (see: http://neo4j.com/docs/stable/deployment-upgrading.html)
You can have multiple Embedded Neo4j databases without installing separate binaries. You just need to be configure the different database path for each instance of the database.
How to re-create the database using EF6?
I have tried both of following post but, i don't know why its not working and getting same error.
How do I generate an EF6 database with migrations enabled, without using update-database?
Migrations is enabled for context ''but the database does not exist or contains no mapped tables
I have already published my sample on the web server. I am using Sql Server 2012 Express DBMS.
When i have created my application and published it on web server it was working fine. It has created database automatically. After that i have made some changes in ApplicationDBContext and added some properties in IdentityModes(ApplicationUser). Then I have migrated database on my Local IIS Express and it was working fine. Then I have tried to publish my sample again on web server but, this time it shows an error.
Migrations is enabled for context 'ApplicationDbContext' but the database does
not exist or contains no mapped tables. Use Migrations to create the database
and its tables, for example by running the 'Update-Database' command from the
Package Manager Console.
I have deleted the database on web server and tried again. but, still i am facing same error. Now, there is an empty database without table.
Application is creating database on User Registration.
I have also read this post and tried to call dbContext.Database.Initialize(true); and ((IObjectContextAdapter)myContext).ObjectContext.CreateDatabase() method but, still its not working.
First, automatic migrations are nice for development but it's a hugely bad idea to rely on them in production. Second, at some point you turned off automatic migrations, which is why your production database is no longer having tables created in it.
Go ahead and leave automatic migrations off; even in development it's better to know exactly what changes you're making to your database by generating a migration, seeing the code that will be executed, and only then running Update-Database to apply those changes.
You have a number of choices in terms of getting schema updates into production, but they all boil down to roughly the same procedure.
Generate a new migration against your local database.
If you want to update your production database via SQL, run Update-Database -Script. This will generate a SQL file with the code to run on the database to migrate the schema. Hand this off to your DBA if you have one or review the SQL code yourself and then apply it manually to your database via Management Studio.
Run Update-Database. This time without -Script to make the changes to your local database schema.
If you didn't generate the SQL file in step 2, view your local database in SQL Server Object Explorer in Visual Studio. Right-click on the local database there and choose, "Schema Compare...". Follow the wizard to compare with your production database. In the end, you can either generate a SQL file with the necessary changes that need to be made (which again, you'd hand off to your DBA if you have one), or you can migrate to production directly from Visual Studio. However, this is not really recommended. It's always best to generate the SQL, which you or your DBA can then inspect before applying the changes live.
Chris Pratt is correct BTW.
I had downloaded a project in which I needed to just run "Update-Database
Here are the quick screenshots
Then at the bottom of Visual Studio
PM> Update-Database
DONE
We're considering using EF 4.3.1 code-based migrations, but aren't clear about how to integrate Migrations with our present dev/deployment methodology...
The app in-question is a desktop WPF app, with each desktop having its own SQL Server instance (each with 4 separate databases). It is deployed into a "field" environment with zero local IT support. Any database migration must be done using SQL scripts executed by the installer (probably InstallShield). There will not be anyone available who can run a command at a PMC prompt to upgrade the db when it is deployed/upgraded at a field location. Thus the ultimate "output" from EF Migrations must be a set of SQL scripts, which the installer will selectively apply.
Also, we have multiple developers making concurrent database changes.. there is NO DBA. Each developer simply checks-in their code (model) changes to TFS, and the next time they do get-latest, the changes to the model automatically cause a new database to be created on their dev system. So how can we now have each developer perform their own local migrations (rather than deleting/recreating their local databases), and then manage/consolidate/combine those migrations? And what about collisions?
During dev and unit-testing, each developer may delete their (entire) local database multiple times during a single checkout/checkin iteration. This works great with Code First, since the database gets automatically rebuilt when the app is restarted. But this means that the _MigrationHistory table in the database also gets deleted. How do we handle this? Don't we need the migration history of each dev system? If not, then where/how do we detect the aggregate changes which need to be applied to the delivered system?
I can see the value of using Migrations to deal with the mechanics of migrating a database, but what's not clear is how to take advantage of it without introducing a centralized database "change-control" bottleneck into the dev cycle, and thus losing one of the key benefits of Code First.
Any insight/advice would be greatly appreciated!
DadCat
I know this is an old question but I thought I'd post some of my experiences with EF Migrations (v6.1).
Each dev will be fine. Migrations are put into classes with a timestamp in the name, so no collisions will happen. The DB on the dev's machine will be updated after doing a get latest and running the app (or the update-database command).
Deleting the local db and recreating is fine. Just make sure the dev runs update-database before adding additional migrations or things will get out of sync. I'm a bit confused as to why they'd need to delete the local DB, but that's out of scope. You may find that your process needs to change to accommodate EF Migrations.
I can't help you with the installer question, as a similar question brought me here. The update-database command does have a -script option that will generate the proper change script, but I'm unclear how to automate that on a build server.
was wondering if it's possible to point the visual web express to a specific folder when it builds the database using entity framework code first. this question stemmed from this one:
mvc connection string code first
anyway, i was able to successfully build the dbase using code first but sql server management studio is looking at a diff folder. is it possible to piont the web express to that folder when creating the database or is it better to just point the sql server management studio to where it's building it to? (does that make sense?) i tried fiddling with the ssms properties but it still won't look at that folder..
It whole depends on the connection string. If you are using default connection string for web application it always creates database in App_Data folder - it is specified by AttachDbFilename=|DataDirectory|DatabaseFileName.mdf. Using this is recommended way if you want your web app to create database because it should have necessary privileges by default.
If you want to place the database "elsewhere" you should not use attached db file and instead let SQL server create database in its default location by calling omitting AttachDbFilename part of the connection string. This can require additional security configuration to allow web application to create the database.
I am currently going through the MvcMusicSore tutorial (MVC 3). I have full sql server 2008 installed and created a local database by running the SqL scripts included in the MvcMusicStore-Assets data folder. However when trying to add the mdf to the AppFolder in Visual Studio 2010 I get the error Access Denied. I am completely stuck at this point and would appreciate any help to resolve this.
Most probably the mdf file is locked by some other process, not allowing the application to read it. If you mounted the database on SQL Server you need to use a connection string with the machine name instead of specifying the mdf file directly.
You can't copy or modify a live working database. And I don't see why you should.
You need connecting to it? Pick a way. LINQ to SQL, Entity Framework, NHibernate, ADO.NET...
If you really want to copy the database file for some reason, you must first stop the MSSQL Service (or detach the database), then do that.
Like others have said, you shouldn't need to add the actual .mdf into your project. If you have it running on your local SQL Server instance, you should be able to add it via Visual Studio's Server Explorer (plus that gets you your connection string).