Sharepoint comments module best approach - sharepoint

I have a requirement to make a comments web part that allows paging. Paging is a common feature throughout the design.
What I was wondering was is a web part the best way of going about this or is there another approach that would be more suited to sharepoint?

I am not 100% sure what you are asking... but the Linq To SharePoint functionality in SharePoint 2010 features the Skip/Take functionality which can provide paging for lists, if that is where your data is being persisted. If you have data being persisted to a database, you can use obviously use the Linq Skip/Take functionality.
Not sure if that helps

Related

Sharepoint Beginner Questions: where to store data?

I'm about to develop an application in Sharepoint.
I've got experience in asp.net and C#, Domino, Java, etc..
Now my 1000$ question: Where can I store data in Sharepoint? I'm aware there are list definitions.. so is it a good practice to store the data "natively" in Sharepoint using lists, or traditionally in an external data container, e.g. ms sql 2008?
Because SharePoint is essentially a .NET Web Application, the options are virtually limitless for how you store data used in your application. The two most common practices would be to use SharePoint lists to store your data, or to store the data in a SQL database.
I would suggest that each have their advantages. A SharePoint list is advantageous because it can be seen by the users and you can leverage out of the box features to allow users to do CRUD operations. A SQL database makes more sense when the size of the data is large and does not fit well within the constructs of the SharePoint lists. SQL is going to perform much faster when doing bulk operations.
Hope this helps!

Choice of technical solution to handling and processing data for a Liferay Project

I am researching to start a new project based on Liferay.
It relies on a system that will require its own data model and a certain agility and flexibility in data management as well as its visualization.
These are my options:
Using Liferay Expando fields and define their own data models. I must do all the view layer.
Using Liferay ECMS adding patches creating structures and hooks that allow me to define data models Master - Detail. It makes much easier viewing issue (velocity templates), but perhaps is the most "dirty" way.
Generating data layer and access to services with Hibernate and Spring. (using Service Factory, for example).
Liferay Service Builder would be similar to the option of creating the platform with Hibernate and Spring.
CRUD generation systems as OpenXava or your XMLPortletFactory
And now my question, what is your advice? What advantages or disadvantages do you think would provide one or another option?
Thanks in advance.
I can't speak for the other CRUD generation systems but I can tell you about the Liferay approaches.
I would take a hybrid approach.
First, I would create the required data models as best as I can with the current requirements in Liferay Service Builder and maintain them there as much as possible. This would require that you rebuild and redeploy your plugin every time you changed the data model but would greatly enhance performance compared to all the other Liferay approaches you've mentioned. Service Builder in that regard is much more rigid and cannot be changed via GUI.
However, in the event for some reason you cannot use Service Builder to redefine your data models and you need certain aspects of it the be changed via GUI, you can also use Expandos to extend the models you've created with Service Builder. So, it is the best of both worlds.
On the other option, using the ECMS would be a specialized case and I would only take this approach if there is a particular requirement it satisfies (like integration with the ECMS).
With that said, Liferay provides you many different ways to create your application. It ultimately depends on how you're going to use your application.

Are SharePoint Lists evil in an SOA based enterprise?

My company is moving from Client/Server applications (thick client apps that makes database calls directly) to a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) (thin or thick clients that call a web service that then does business logic and calls the database).
Part of this includes using SharePoint as our client (not our only client type, but the major one). I have been watching the Pluralsight training on SharePoint and I am starting to see a lot about SharePoint Lists.
SharePoint Lists seem to be to a core part of SharePoint. However they also seem to be a huge step backward architecturally speaking. These are my concerns:
Using these lists, I will have my SharePoint webparts hitting the data directly again (much like where we were with 2 tier client/server apps).
This confuses the data layer big time. Do I store my list of clients in the SQL Server database? Or a SharePoint list? Or both? (say it ain't so!) If both, how do I keep them in Sync?
If I store the data in SharePoint Lists do I then have to have my Web Services using the SharePoint Client Object Model to get at the lists (for non-SharePoint clients)?
Basically SharePoint Lists seem like a very very bad idea. But what I hear is that it is one of the big benefits of SharePoint. (Though I know that there are things like resource management and permissions that are also useful in SharePoint.)
SharePoint Lists seem like an attempt at low grade data storage. (With out all the benefits of a full data management solution like SQL Server.)
So here are my questions: What are the right/best practice reasons why would I use SharePoint Lists over web services that access a SQL Server? And can SharePoint even work normally using web services to get and update data? (Basically, if I don't use lists, do I lose a lot of functionality?)
SharePoint lists are not a one size fits all solution to data storage. There are a great deal of scenarios where you'll want to use data available from an external system, like an existing CRM database, inside of SharePoint.
SharePoint 2007 used a concept called Business Data Catalog to address some of these scenarios, allowing a read-only view of external system data in SharePoint lists.
SharePoint 2010 greatly expands on the SharePoint 2007 capabilities with Business Connectivity Services, allowing for full read/write from SharePoint lists, with API access allowing custom connectors to be implemented in code for whatever backend system you may be trying to access (a SQL Server provider is provided out of the box). Here's a pretty thorough primer on the BCS, and there's a lot more information to be found on MSDN.
Be wary of trying to use SharePoint lists as traditional tables in a RDBMS, these aren't their purpose and it will only lead to intense headaches down the road.
While I agree with the answer by OedipusPrime, I feel your question "Why would I use lists" warrants a more detailed answer.
The short version is, you probably shouldn't. What SharePoint gives you are lists which are a bit 'database-like', but simple enough that your ordinary user can cope with them. They're quite flexible for users. It also gives you a user interface to interact with the lists and data.
You're not using the UI, and you're probably quite happy with SQL, so SQL should probably be your choice. There's nothing that you can do in SharePoint that you can't do yourself in SQL (often faster) - but SQL isn't as user friendly for non-techies to set things up. SharePoint isn't a "full data management solution" like SQL - it's more like ASP.NET on steroids, and it has different advantages. (That's why its back end is ... SQL)
So, where would you store your data? SQL or Lists. One or the other - don't do both, that never works out well. If your data is in SQL, you can expose it in SharePoint with the BCS as mentioned already.
If your data is in a SharePoint list, yes, you can use the Client Object model. Or you can use Web Services directly. Or the REST API. All those are valid options.
Or, you could expose data from your database via your own Web Services, and then consume those via SharePoint's BCS, allowing you to present your data in SharePoint (with full CRUD, if you want) without your application becoming dependent upon it.
You are partially right. Regarding your options, here is the route you should go:
You should store the data only in lists. Not in SQL server. The data in lists is ultimately stored in SharePoint content database in SQL server and there is no point syncing it.
To have your clients access the data, your web services can call out of the box web services exposed in SharePoint which can operate on lists data.
See this article on overview of web services exposed by SharePoint:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee538665.aspx
http://www.sharepointmonitor.com/2007/01/sharepoint-web-service/
This is one of the big questions that faces someone new to SharePoint - should I store X in a SharePoint list, or in a SQL Server table?
SharePoint lists have similarities to database tables in that they have rows (items) and columns and the equivalent of triggers (event receivers). Data management pages are part of SharePoint so there is no need to build pages for updating and adding items to the table, and additionally the lists can be exposed as RSS feeds or through web services. They can also be versioned and participate in a workflow. Another advantage is that the contents of the lists are automatically included in content backups, so there is no need to manage a separate backup and restore process – everything is in the content database. There may not necessarily be a performance impact because there are several caching mechanisms which come into play.
A SharePoint list should certainly be considered as a storage mechanism, even for large datasets with appropriate treatment. In one sense the SharePoint list is acting as an effective data access layer, bearing in mind that ultimately the data is being stored in a SQL Server database anyway. What you do not get is the rigour of relational modelling, normalisation, referential integrity, optimisation of the execution plan, and all the other tools of the DBA’s craft. If the efficient management of the data is dependent on those skills then storing the data directly in its own database is probably a better choice. You can still get at the data through BCS, as well as through custom code.
A word of warning: on no account be tempted to interact with the SharePoint content databases directly.

Dynamic Data - Success or Failure?

Azure, probably ASP.NET Webforms. We're building a management interface for about 8 tables. Usual CRUD :-)
2 backend users, and doesn't need to look flash.
We'd like to use Mindscape's LightSpeed as the ORM tool
Question: Is Dynamic Data worth pursuing? (Mindscape have a connector to DD).
We've also got the Telerik Suite which is next on the list to check out.
Rapid development here is key.
For rapid development, Dynamic Data is great. In its current form it has some good extension points. However, I think you are stuck with either Entity Framework or Linq to SQL for O/RM solutions. Not necessarily a bad thing for an 8 table app, but something to consider.

SharePoint List like Data Access Interface

I am impressed by the way we programmatically access lists in SharePoint. I percieve it as a Data Access Layer, while modeling the database is as simple as defining the columns in the List.
I am looking for a tool OR an application that would give me similar interface to a database. Basically, for some reason I cannot use SharePoint and I don't wish to take up the responsibility of modeling, deploying and maintaining the database. I find the SharePoint way of persistence management acceptable and exciting.
Can anyone suggest me something even close to this.
BTW, my application is on ASP.Net and my preferred RDBMS is MS SQL Server.
If you don't want the overhead and expense of a Sharepoint installation, 90% of the time all you really need is WSS 3.0 (free with a windows server license).
For auto generated entity classes you can use Linq To Sharepoint (SPMetal)
For hand written POCO entities you can try using SharepointCommon ORM
Use NOSQL database like MongoDb or CouchDB which are schema less, allowing you to freely add fields to JSON documents without having to first define schema.

Resources