Comments on: Why Entity Framework when we have LINQ to SQL? http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html Tech writing blog Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:04:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: penyaskito http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html/comment-page-1#comment-44165 penyaskito Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:37:55 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=391#comment-44165 @Clyde: MS is targeted to the MDA market too, but they call it Software Factories. @Clyde: MS is targeted to the MDA market too, but they call it Software Factories.

]]> By: Clyde Davies http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html/comment-page-1#comment-43671 Clyde Davies Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:28:39 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=391#comment-43671 Good (and perspicacious) point. As always. :-) Good (and perspicacious) point. As always. :-)

]]> By: Tim http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html/comment-page-1#comment-43606 Tim Thu, 08 Nov 2007 14:49:59 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=391#comment-43606 Clyde, It could go in that direction, but it is not strictly MDA since you cannot do model-first development. You actually have to start with the database, which is possibly back-to-front from a theoretical point of view, but there are plenty of people with databases that they want to publish. It does look more productive than other model-driven tools I have looked at. It does not attempt to write an app for you. Tim Clyde,

It could go in that direction, but it is not strictly MDA since you cannot do model-first development. You actually have to start with the database, which is possibly back-to-front from a theoretical point of view, but there are plenty of people with databases that they want to publish.

It does look more productive than other model-driven tools I have looked at. It does not attempt to write an app for you.

Tim

]]> By: Clyde Davies http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html/comment-page-1#comment-43601 Clyde Davies Thu, 08 Nov 2007 14:35:58 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=391#comment-43601 I'm surprised that Microsoft have produced this as it seems to me to be targeted at the MDA market. MS don't have much in the way of MDA modelling tools, and MDA itself has promised much but seems to have delivered little in productivity gains. Or perhaps it's just me being too cynical again. I’m surprised that Microsoft have produced this as it seems to me to be targeted at the MDA market. MS don’t have much in the way of MDA modelling tools, and MDA itself has promised much but seems to have delivered little in productivity gains. Or perhaps it’s just me being too cynical again.

]]> By: Tim http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html/comment-page-1#comment-43299 Tim Wed, 07 Nov 2007 14:38:36 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=391#comment-43299 <blockquote> Is it DBMS indepedent? </blockquote> All you need, apparently, is an Entity Framework Provider. Apparently IBM already has a preview of one for DB2, and others will follow. Tim

Is it DBMS indepedent?

All you need, apparently, is an Entity Framework Provider. Apparently IBM already has a preview of one for DB2, and others will follow.

Tim

]]> By: Clyde Davies http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html/comment-page-1#comment-43252 Clyde Davies Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:58:22 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=391#comment-43252 Is it DBMS indepedent? Is it DBMS indepedent?

]]> By: Ian Cooper http://www.itwriting.com/blog/391-why-entity-framework-when-we-have-linq-to-sql.html/comment-page-1#comment-43183 Ian Cooper Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:06:00 +0000 http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=391#comment-43183 LINQ to Entities is a more complex abstraction because it tries to insulate you from the physical representation of your persistent store. This does give you the ability to re-architect the store, or use a range of technologies. The price is the additional complexity, in particular the need to understand EQL as opposed to SQL as the language into which queries are translated first, which may make determining things like performance characteristics hard. In addition LINQ to Entities won't support persistent ignorance for its first release, which means it won't play nicely with Test First approaches. So I would suggest start with LINQ to SQL, and if it does not meet your needs, then look towards LINQ to * where that includes LINQ to Entities but also proposed ideas like LINQ to NHibernate. It's also important to separate the idea of lINQ from the underlying providers of ORM in LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities. LINQ is a language syntax 'to SQL' and 'to Entities' are providers of IQueryable implementations and API's for data access LINQ to Entities is a more complex abstraction because it tries to insulate you from the physical representation of your persistent store. This does give you the ability to re-architect the store, or use a range of technologies.

The price is the additional complexity, in particular the need to understand EQL as opposed to SQL as the language into which queries are translated first, which may make determining things like performance characteristics hard.

In addition LINQ to Entities won’t support persistent ignorance for its first release, which means it won’t play nicely with Test First approaches.

So I would suggest start with LINQ to SQL, and if it does not meet your needs, then look towards LINQ to * where that includes LINQ to Entities but also proposed ideas like LINQ to NHibernate.

It’s also important to separate the idea of lINQ from the underlying providers of ORM in LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities. LINQ is a language syntax ‘to SQL’ and ‘to Entities’ are providers of IQueryable implementations and API’s for data access

]]>