Talk:Microsoft Data Access Components

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured articleMicrosoft Data Access Components is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 22, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
October 14, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
August 21, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Untitled[edit]

Links:

Short note of thanks to Microsoft developer Angel Saenz-Badillos[edit]

I asked for comment on this article, and he kindly pointed me to two interesting articles. Many thanks for this assistance! - Ta bu shi da yu 02:45, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Connection pooling[edit]

We need some info about this. See Pooling in the Microsoft Data Access Components. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:34, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Categories[edit]

I helped! :"D - RoyBoy 800 04:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks mate :-) Ta bu shi da yu 12:27, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Feedback[edit]

See here :-) I'm pretty happy with the feedback! Woohoo! - Ta bu shi da yu 04:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Article needs to indicate when last updated as it appears this was some time ago in that paragraph three (and elsewhere as 'latest') refers to "The current version is 2.8 service pack 1," when clearly it is up to "11" or more. Note - I came here trying to find out how to identify what version of MDAC is installed on my os. And still looking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wguru (talkcontribs) 04:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Page move[edit]

I've moved the Microsoft technology variation of this four letter acronym to its full name, Microsoft Data Access Components. While in the scope of computing, MDAC may be a popular acronym, but the full name is certainly a more correct name for the article than its abbreviation, especially in light of there being other uses of the acronym. Warrens 23:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

In doing so, you did several things.
  1. You have removed the page history. I wrote most of this article, and it was all in the page history. I have been forced to do a page merge to get the history back. There are very few advantages to editing Wikipedia: one, however, is that people can see what you wrote. If you remove my page history, you do a disservice to me, and you reduce the incentive to edit the site.
  2. This article had a talk page. Where is it now? - fixed - Ta bu shi da yu 15:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
  3. It is most commonly known as MDAC, not Microsoft Data Access Components, so this is wrong. We use the most commonly used name.
I realise that you meant well, but please be more careful in future! - Ta bu shi da yu 15:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Windows Data Access Components 6.0 - Windows Vista[edit]

I would like to have a seperate section for Windows Data Access Components 6.0, as will be included with Windows Vista: Windows Data Access Components SDK

I also would like to have the MDAC 9.0 beta out of the MDAC Release list, since it was never an official release. MDAC 9.0 is replaced by SQL Native CLient.

Thank you.

--KlaasNekeman 12:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

No probs... however, if you would like you can click on the edit button and type in some info yourself :-) - Ta bu shi da yu 08:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Done - thanks for pointing this out! - Ta bu shi da yu 08:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I have moved MDAC 9.0 and Windows DAC out of the table, since it is a bit confusing. I think the version history is complete now as it covers all releases of MDAC. If you want a list of Windows DAC versions you may want to create a new article.

P.S. The MDAC page is very large, however I would like to see the component descriptions move to seperate articles. For example the ADO section of MDAC is larger then the seperate ADO article. We are writing an Encyclopedia, not an resource bin!

--KlaasNekeman 19:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Microsoft Jet Database Engine and JRO[edit]

"In later versions of Jet, the engine was extended to run SQL queries,"

That's wrong. Jet could always run SQL Queries. But more to the point, the only versions ever included in MDAC could always run SQL Queries.

"a database engine used for Microsoft Access, Microsoft Exchange Server"

The database engine used by exchange is a different database engine than that used by Access. They are both Jet engines, but they are different Jet engines. The Exchange engine does not run SQL queries, does not include Rushmore technology, and was not ever included in MDAC.
Source? - Ta bu shi da yu 00:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"a modified form of an Indexed Sequential Access Method (ISAM) database"

I think this is wrong, although it is a common myth. I think that Jet uses the Random Access database primitives provided by the operating system, not the Sequential Access database primitives. The confusion arises because the Access and then DAO also provided a Sequential Access API, which was intended to be attractive to dBase programmers, but which was ananthama to RDMS programmers. dBase and dBase like programes originally use ISAM, hence the Installable ISAM interface for accessing dBase files. You will find insults claiming that Access is an ISAM system, but I don't think you will be able to find anything authorative supporting the assertion that the Jet Engine is ISAM. Since I never never met anyone who used Access 1.0, which apparently was only a pale prelude to Access 1.1, Access 2.0, and Jet 2.5, I'm unable to say if it was an ISAM system, but it wasn't called Jet, and certainly wasn't included in anything called MDAC.

And finally, a general problem with the use of the past tense. "DAO allowed programmers access to the Jet engine."

You've got a problem with the tenses, because although DAO is no longer part of MDAC, it is still part of Windows (at least until Vista), and still part of Access.
I don't have a solution to the problem, because it appears that merely changing everything to the present tense would be even worse.
Also, it appears that MDAC, ADO, OLEDB and ODBC are obsolete and depreciated technologies, so perhaps that whole classification needs to be rethought

(david)218.214.18.240 11:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Are MDAC, ADO, OLE-DB and ODBC really obsoleted and deprecated? If so, please point me to where Microsoft have documented this and I will duly update the article. I wasn't aware that they had been, however. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Table changes[edit]

Can we have some sort of explanation of the following changes? Also, can I ask that people refrain from using the undo facility unnecessarily? - Ta bu shi da yu 06:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

MDAC difference between SDK and Runtime distributables[edit]

I have had some discussion with Ta bu shi da yu about MDAC release dates. I think I have contributed a lot to this page which took me quite an effort. The problem is some information about release dates of different versions of MDAC. This article tells MDAC 1.0 was first released as an OLE DB SDK. A software development kit only announced to few developers. Most people who want information about MDAC would like to know about Runtime Distributables. These were first released to public with Visual Studio 97 (InterDev is a component of it). To remove the SDK and Beta (Community Preview) releases from the version table makes the table more readable for users. I suggest to create a seperate section for SDK versions if necessary.

P.S. I don't want to start a undo-war, I only updated some information on the table about public release dates. The source you are referring too is not from Microsoft itself either, some information is wrong. I don't have time to update all referers to different Microsoft Product launches. If you have a specific question please ask me. I'm willing to help you update this page on a regular base, but if all changes get wiped every time where's the fun in that? --KlaasNekeman 23:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

That's interesting, because there was no coordinated distribution of MDAC 1.0. See this article from Microsoft:
"MDAC 1.0 existed more as concept than a coordinated, stand-alone setup program. MDAC 1.0 components included ODBC 3.0, OLE DB 1.1, ADO 1.0, and the Advanced Data Connector 1.0. The Advanced Data Connector, at the time, utilized a subset of the ADO recordset and was independent of ADO. Previously ODBC existed pretty much on its own, although the OLE DB 1.0 SDK released in August of 1996 was beginning to point the way towards MDAC. In the Winter of 1996, the MDAC 1.0 stack was released in a variety of different distribution mechanisms, but without the centralized or coordinated effort that arrived with MDAC 1.5."
I have read a Google translated version of the German article, and unless Google translate has got it very wrong, I believe that they also concede the same point. - Ta bu shi da yu 01:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Let's look at each edit:

  • [1] Misuse of undo button. Of the many abuses, the proposed info on MDAC 9.0 was removed. Also note that RDS 1.5 superseded ADC 1.0 was removed. The release date of MDAC 1.5a was changed from September 1997 - March 1998 to October 6, 1997. MDAC 1.5b was changed from September 1997 - March 1998 to December 2, 1997. MDAC 2.0 SP1 was changed from July 1, 1998 to October 25, 1998 See MS KB article 231943. The only thing that is correct is that it was not NT 4.0 SP1 but SP4. 2.0 SP2 was changed from July 1, 1998 to January 1999 (see previous MDAC history from Microsoft). 2.1 was changed from July 11, 1998 to November 1998. (again see previous MDAC history article from MS). 2.8 was changed from August 2003 to March 28, 2003 and 2.8SP1 from May 2005 to August 6, 2004 (see MS article). Where are the source for these changes please?
Pennskog.com MDAC 1.5 subrelease dates are here. This information is also found on Microsoft website KB190463. Not every Microsoft KB article has correct information btw, so you are basing undoing my work on one single KBarticle with some global information. MDAC 1.5b came with the NT 4.0 Option pack release December 2, 1997, as mentioned on WindowsITPro, Pegasus3D, Microsoft, CNET etc for example.
  • [2] "MDAC 1.0 was available for download from Microsoft website as OLE DB 1.1 SDK and ODBC 3.0 SDK" Source for this assertion?
"MDAC 1.0 existed more as concept than a coordinated, stand-alone setup program. MDAC 1.0 components included ODBC 3.0, OLE DB 1.1, ADO 1.0, and the Advanced Data Connector 1.0. The Advanced Data Connector, at the time, utilized a subset of the ADO recordset and was independent of ADO. Previously ODBC existed pretty much on its own, although the OLE DB 1.0 SDK released in August of 1996 was beginning to point the way towards MDAC. In the Winter of 1996, the MDAC 1.0 stack was released in a variety of different distribution mechanisms, but without the centralized or coordinated effort that arrived with MDAC 1.5."

So Winter 1996 the MDAC 1.0 stack was released. Not in August. It was not centralized distributed. This means developers had to include the MDAC components with their programs. It does not say it was not available for download.

  • [3] Link to Microsoft Presspass article about release of Visual Studio 97. Again, MDAC 1.0 was not released in any coordinated fashion.
"Visual Studio 97 was actually mix-and-match as to which product installed which version of ODBC (and with it potentially OLE DB and ADO). Visual Interdev, for example, included Active Server Pages, which was the component of Internet Information Server 3.0 that installed ODBC 3.0, OLE DB 1.1 and ADO/ADC 1.0. However, Visual Basic 5.0 installed ODBC version 2.65 and no OLE DB or ADO components. Visual C++ 5.0 installed ODBC 2.65, but it also included install options for Visual Studio 97 with a choice of installing the OLE DB 1.5 SDK, which gave you the entire MDAC 1.0 stack." - Microsoft KB190463
  • [4] Wrong. MDAC 1.0 wsa not released in a coordinated distributable, therefore there is no offical release date!!!!
I don't see why you can't speak of a release date.
  • [5] Office 97 removed from 1.5b of MDAC. However, the very source that was cited above was used, and this is what it says!
What source?
  • [6] "Since MDAC 1.0 is known publicly as OLE DB 1.1 SDK, release date has changed to December 1996". Er, no. MDAC 1.0 is not known publicly as the OLE DB 1.1 SDK.
This article This article is the only article which says something about MDAC 1.1. Give me one source from Microsoft itself about MDAC 1.1 please, if not then there is no MDAC 1.1! So when do we speak technically of a first release of MDAC? The moment OLE DB was combined with ODBC. That happened with Visual Studio 97 to have all Database access components in one package. Thats what MDAC is about.
  • [7] that's fair - there were five releases.

Due to the lack of sources and clear inaccuracies, I'm reverting. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Pleas undo your revert. I'm still a bit new to Wikipedia, can you give a link about how to refer properly to weblinks on wikipedia?
I'm sorry for all miscommunication, but now I know what went wrong. We both used different sources for information.--KlaasNekeman 11:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
It's OK. What I think we need to do, in that case, is to provide both the information from the MS KB article and the alternate information from the other sources you have found. To cite something in a footnote, use the syntax <ref>Citation</ref>. It automatically adds a footnote number for you and adds it to the footnotes section. I don't have a problem with citing conflicting information so long as we include the MS official release dates. It's not possible to speak of an official MS release date for MDAC 1.0 as it was only really officially released as it's own product when MDAC 1.1 was released. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

bad links[edit]

I got all the links that return 404 Not Found in HTTP, but there are still many obsolete links in this article.--SallyForth123 00:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

ADO.NET - 2 facts wrong[edit]

1) Article says "Unlike the old ADO Recordset, the Dataset's design allows for disconnected data." That is not a true fact about ADO. If the recordset is opened Client-Sided, it can be disconnected. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/184397 2) Article says "a Recordset was a forward-only reader". That is not true either. The default was a server-sided, forward-only, read-only recordset, but you could change this to dynaamic, keyset or static cursors and a variety of lock modes other than read-only. Stephen Howe (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Microsoft Data Access Components. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Microsoft Data Access Components. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:57, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Microsoft Data Access Components. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:23, 29 January 2018 (UTC)