How to migrate multiple users' Access db's to one single SQLServer db - delphi

UPDATED 2010-11-25
A legacy stand-alone application (A1) is being re-created as a web application (A2).
A1 is written in Delphi 7 and uses a MS Access database to store the data. A1 has been distributed to ~1000 active users that we have no control over during the build of A2.
The database has ~50 tables, some which contain user data, some which contain template data (which does not need to be copied); 3-4 of these user tables are larger (<5000 records), the rest is small (<100).
Once A2 is 'live', users of A1 should be able to migrate to A2. I'm looking for a comparison of scenario's to do so.
One option is to develop a stand-alone 'update' tool for these users, and have this update tool talk to the A2 database through webservices.
Another option is to allow users to upload their Access db (~15 MB) database to our server, run some kind of SSIS package (overnight, perhaps) to get this into A2 for that user, and delete the Access db afterward.
Am I missing options? Which option is 'best' (I understand this may be somewhat subjective, but hopefully the pro's and cons for the scenario's can at least be made clear).
I'll gladly make this a community wiki if so demanded.
UPDATE 2010-11-23: it has been suggested that a variant of scenario 1 would be to have the update tool/application talk directly to the production database. Is this feasible?
UPDATE 2011-11: By now, this has been taken into production. Users upload the .zip file the .mdb is in, which is unpacked and placed in a secure location. A nightly SSIS scheduled job comes along and moves the data to staging tables, which are then moved into production through SP's.

I would lean toward uploading the complete database and running the conversion on the server.
In either case you need to write a conversion program. The real questions is how much of the conversion you deploy and run on the customers' computers. I would keep that part as simple as possible, i.e. just the upload. That way if you find any bugs or unexpected data during the conversion you can simply update the server and not need to re-deploy your conversion program.
The total amount of data you are talking about is not too large to upload, and it sounds like the majority of it would need to be uploaded in any case.
If you install a conversion program locally it would need a way to recover from a conversion that stopped part way through. That can be a lot more complicated than simply restarting an upload of the access database.
Also you don't indicate there would be any need for the web services after the conversions are done. The effort to put those services together, and keep them running and secure during the conversions would be far more than a simple upload application or web form.
Another factor is how quickly your customers would convert. If some of them will run the current application for some time period you may need to update your conversion application as the server database changes over time. If you upload the database and run the conversion on the server then only the server conversion program would need to be updated. There would not be any risk of a customer downloading the conversion program but not running it until after the server databases were updated.
We have a similar case where we choose to run the conversion on the server. We built a web page for the user to upload their files. In that case there is nothing to deploy for the new application. The only downside we found is getting the user to select the correct file. If you use a web form for the upload you can't pre-select file name for the user because of security restrictions. In our case we knew where the file was located but the customers did not. We provide directions on the upload page for the users to help them out. You could avoid this by writing a small desktop application to perform the upload for the users.
The only downside I see to writing a server based conversion is some of your template data will be uploaded that is un-needed. That is a small amount of data anyway.
Server Pros:
- No need to re-deploy the conversion due to bugs, unexpected data, or changes to the server database
- Easier to secure (possibly), there is only one access point - the upload. Of course you are accepting customer data in the form of an access database so you still can't trust anything in it.
Server Cons:
- Upload un-needed template data
Desktop Pros:
- ? I'm having trouble coming up with any
Desktop Cons:
- May need multiple versions deployed
As to talking to a server database directly. I have one application that talks to a hosted database directly to avoid creating web services. It works OK, but if given the chance I would not take that route again. The internet is dropped on a regular basis and the SQL Providers do not recover very well. We have trained our clients just to try again when that happens. We did this to avoid creating web services for our desktop application. We just reference the IP address in the server connection string. There is an entire list of security reasons not to take this route - we were comfortable with our security setup and possible risks. In the end the trade off of using the desktop application with no modifications was not worth having an unstable product.

Since a new database server to be likely one the standard database engines in the industry, why not consider linking the access application to this database server? That way you can simply send your data up to sql server that way.
I'm not really sure why you'd consider even suggest using a set of web services to a database engine when access supports an ODBC link to that database engine. So one potential upgrade path would be to simply issue a new application in access that has to be placed in the same directory as to where their current existing data file (and application) is now. Then on startup this application can simply RE link all of its tables to your existing database, plus come with a pre link set of tables to the database server. This is going to be far less work in building up some type of web services approach. I suppose part of this centers around where the database servers going to be hosted, but in most cases perhaps during the migration period, you have the database server running somewhere where everyone can get access to it. And a good many web providers allow external links to their database now.
It's also not clear that on the database server system you're going to create separate databases for each one, or as you suggest in your title it's all going to be placed into one database. Since is going to be placed into one database, then during the upsizing, an additional column that identifies the user location or however you plan to distinguish each database will be added during this upsizing process to distinguish each user set of data.
How easy this type of migration be will depend on the schema and database layout that the developers are using for the new system. Hopefully and obviously it has provisions for each user or location or however you plan to distinguish each individual user of the system. So, I don't suggest web services, but do suggest linking tables from the Access application to the instance of SQL server (or whatever server you run).

How best to do this will depend on the referential integrity and business rules that must be enforced, if there are any. For example, is there the possibility of duplicates when the databases are merged? I gather they are being merged from your somewhat cryptic statement: "And yes, one database for all, aspnet membership for user id's".

If you have no control of the 1000+ users of A1, how are you going to get them all to convert to A2?
Have you considered giving them an SQL Server Express DB to upgrade to, and letting them host the Web App on their own servers?

Related

Database encryption options for Ruby on Rails hosted on Heroku

One of the clients I'm working with is requesting that I encrypt my database. The problem is, none of my other clients need or care about this.
I am wondering two things:
How costly (performance) is it to encrypt my entire database? I.e. how much slower will my read / writes be?
Is there anyway I can provision a small separate DB, or segment my current DB on Heroku and host that one specific client's data (wherein their data is fully encrypted).
Thanks!
Ringo

How to update iOS SQLite database from website form?

I have been working on iOS application for sometime, and I am using Core Data to manage the SQLite database for the application. The users of the application can update the data associated with their account using the application, but I would like to create a simple web form where users could update certain information asosciated with their account. Basically I would like a user to be able to access a web adress from their personal smartphone or computer, login, then update information asociated with the account stored on the iOS device. What are the possible solutions I could use to accomplish this?
Breaking down your question:
Currently you have an iOS app which uses a local SQLite DB to store data
You want to let users update information in this DB remotely (i.e, via a web site)
Unfortunately to do this you're going to need to make some significant changes to how your app works. This is because it's impractical - if not nearly impossible - to do this kind of thing and keep the database local to your device.
The standard way of achieving this would be to store your database remotely on a web server, and then have both your app and your web form interact with this server to retrieve and update data.
There are lots of different ways to do this. Fundamentally, you'll need a server running a database, and a web service to access it. You could implement this yourself, using something like MySQL or PostgreSQL, along with a language of your choosing (Ruby, PHP, Node, etc). Another option is to use one of several 'backend as a service' providers. These are companies that provide 'out of the box' backend functionality for mobile apps. Two popular providers are Parse (owned by Facebook) and Stackmob.
Whether you choose to do it yourself or use a backend provider will depend on how confident you are. It's not an especially hard or tricky thing to put together on your own, but there are several common pitfalls you're likely to encounter.

the reason not to access directly from xcode to mssql?

I am planning to build an iOS app with using DB(Ms-Sql).
However, people recommends not to access DB from Xcode.
They recommend me to use php or asp for accessing db through a webpage.
I want to know the reason.
Also I am going to use DB only for (view) select line (not insert, update nor delete).
so is it possible to access directly to db for viewing purpose only?
thank you
It's generally bad for an application (mobile, web, any client) to directly have access to any database for security issues. Clients really should not be accessing the database, which is often holding very private/secure data. It opens up vulnerabilities (i.e., sql injection attack).
A set of web services written in php or java or some back-end technology is a more secure, scalable system. These web services can connect to the database and retrieve data. Your iOS application can call the web services and receive the data..for example in the form of XML or JSON.

What Data System do companies like Yell.com use in their apps?

I currently develop an iOS app for a local business directory, and I use SQLite. This sadly means I must do several hours of data entry when new businesses are added and push the updated DB out, because the desktop site uses the Joomla CMS.
Obviously companies that provide directory services don't have to worry about such things. How do they do it? Core Data accompanied by a screen scraper?
PS. I apologise if this question is inappropriate to be asked on StackOverflow, I didn't know where else to ask.
Generally these companies have a client/server architecture where the data lives on a centralised server and the mobile apps pull the data through an exposed API over the internet.
To replicate this yourself, you would have a server with all the data and expose it through an API/web service (so you'd need to think about authentication and security) which your mobile app pulls from when it needs to update the database or just have the query sent to the web service and return the appropriate results so the database does not live on the iOS device itself. The downside to the first approach (updating the DB) is you'd need to wait for the DB to fully update before the user could use the application and the downside to the second approach is to make queries, the client would need an active internet connection.
The first thing you'd want to look at is if/how you can expose the data stored in the Joomla CMS through an API (XML/JSON?)

Suggestions for a practical User Authentication System?

I hate to re-invent the wheel so I'm looking for an existing solution to create a simple authentication system for my application. I've experimented for a while with using CardSpace or OpenID inside the application but I can't convince management that these would be working solutions.
Of course, I could just build a simple login dialog where username, domain and (hashed) password is stored inside a database table and I've done such a thing many times already. I hate this solution since I feel it's just a weak option. And I don't want to spend too much time trying to make the whole logon system as secure as possible, especially since I suspect that there should be existing solutions for this.
So, next to OpenID/OpenAuth and CardSpace, are there any other Authentication solutions that can be used from a Delphi/WIN32 application?
Right now, the application will be used by many customers. Most are single-user environments, although it's likely that some of those will start to have two to 5 users once this authentication system is added. But we want to support a customer who needs to allow about 500 different users on the same application. These are spread over about 100 offices but they all connect to the same SQL Server database. (MS Access right now, but we're making it possible for this user to use SQL Server instead.) To make matters even more interesting, the customer uses Citrix to centralize the user systems and the application has straight access to the SQL Server database. It's not an ideal setup but then again, the customer isn't really paying for this. We're just setting up a test environment. A proof-of-concept which the customer will test for us. Flaws will be solved later on. But right now I need quick solutions and one of them is a practical authentication system where I don't have to write a lot of code.
Have you considered using SQL Server authentication and not allowing authentication for those using an Access Database?
If you use the new SQL Server Native Client and SQL Server 2005 you can have passwords expire and change them from your client application. All of the tools to create and manage user accounts are built into SQL Server Management Studio. And if you decide later to support Windows Authentication you just need to modify your connection string.
We have a system where users on the network use Windows Authentication so they don't need to worry about another user name and password. For users that access the system via a VPN and non-domain joined machines they use SQL Authentication.
Here is the MSDN Page that talks about dealing with passwords programmatically in SQL Server 2005
You do need to make sure that SQL Server Native Client is installed, but that is simple compared to the rest of ADO.
I would suggest then
Delphi - since you are using Delphi :)
Open source - since you need to be able to figure out what is wrong if there is a problem, you probably want it cheap.
So, here are some solutions:
http://www.torry.net/pages.php?id=313
CoWindowsAccount v.1.0
SSecurity v.1.2.1.3
http://free-password-manager-plus.software.informer.com/1.6/
It might work for your purposes, but why not ask Windows for the current domain and user name, and use them as unique IDs. Windows has already done the authentication, and it saves the users making up new passwords or anything. I've used this to good effect. I also made it optional to include the machine name in the ID, so that the same user on different computers would also be unique.

Resources