[Newbie] Cloud database on VB6

[jpbro]

Or as the service provider I use calls it "cloud hosting".

Without getting into a buzzword fight about what the cloud is, in my experience what almost 100% of customers are really saying when they ask for the product to be in the cloud is for it to work on their phone/tablet/browser without requiring installation (or at the most requiring installation from an app store). The stuff happening on the other side of the browser/app is of absolutely no interest to them (so long as it is secure, backed up, and highly available). Whether it's a real McCoy "cloud service" like Azure or "cloud hosted" VPS is neither here nor there for the customer - it's an implementation choice for the vendor (as everything on that side of the equation is up to the vendor to build, maintain, and pay for).

Their other customer concern is the cost, and in my experience the less complicated the better. This makes the choice of "cloud service" or "cloud hosting" a marketing issue too. I've found that it is easier to sell "get access to our service for $X/month" than "get access to our service, for $X+$Y+$Z per month for CPU/IO/Network bandwidth - just remember to check the dashboard periodically and be careful how much you are using if you don't want a surprising invoice at the end of the month!".

That's my experience with my product/service & market - depending on your product/service and market, your experience might be the completely different of course.

[Niya]

PS: Not sure it's "insane" for no one in this thread to suggest something that they haven't had any experience with, but thanks for bringing it up based on your experience.

My apologies if you or anyone felt slighted by this comment but I didn't mean it like that. It's just that as I was reading through the posts, I saw people suggesting all manner wizardry, that involved everything from HTTP to JSON. All I kept thinking was that all this could be avoided by doing nothing more than changing a connection string.

In order to port an SQL Server Database from a local server to the Azure cloud, all you have to do is copy the database to the cloud and change the connection string your application uses to connect to it. That is literally all you have to do.

Now I know the OP is using Access. However, it is possible to convert an Access database to an SQL Server database. In some cases, this can be very straight forward and quick. After that, all you have to do is change the provider and connection string for the client application to connect and communicate with SQL Server properly. From there, you just copy the SQL Server database to the Azure cloud and change the connection string again and you're done. This can all be done in like less than a day with almost zero changes to the front-end client app and no need to learn any special API to deal with the cloud. You just deal with it the same way you deal with a regular SQL Server database.

The simplicity of the option is why I felt it was insane not to suggest it.

[PlausiblyDamp]

My apologies if you or anyone felt slighted by this comment but I didn't mean it like that. It's just that as I was reading through the posts, I saw people suggesting all manner wizardry, that involved everything from HTTP to JSON. All I kept thinking was that all this could be avoided by doing nothing more than changing a connection string.

In order to port an SQL Server Database from a local server to the Azure cloud, all you have to do is copy the database to the cloud and change the connection string your application uses to connect to it. That is literally all you have to do.

Now I know the OP is using Access. However, it is possible to convert an Access database to an SQL Server database. In some cases, this can be very straight forward and quick. After that, all you have to do is change the provider and connection string for the client application to connect and communicate with SQL Server properly. From there, you just copy the SQL Server database to the Azure cloud and change the connection string again and you're done. This can all be done in like less than a day with almost zero changes to the front-end client app and no need to learn any special API to deal with the cloud. You just deal with it the same way you deal with a regular SQL Server database.

The simplicity of option is why I felt it was insane not to suggest it.

Plus the fact that if you don't need more than 2G and it isn't going to be a lot of traffic it can be had for under $7 a month, better performance and more storage will cost more though...

[jpbro]

Isn't there more to it then just copying the database to the cloud and changing the connection string? It sounds scary as heck to me to have an SQL Server instance sitting open to the Internet. The HTTPS/FCGI and JSON stuff adds complexity, but it provides extra separation between the Internet and your data. You build an API for the client/browser to use to work against your data at arms length and that has an added security benefit, no?

[Niya]

Isn't there more to it then just copying the database to the cloud and changing the connection string? It sounds scary as heck to me to have an SQL Server instance sitting open to the Internet. The HTTPS/FCGI and JSON stuff adds complexity, but it provides extra separation between the Internet and your data. You build an API for the client/browser to use to work against your data at arms length and that has an added security benefit, no?

Well, like I said, I only dipped my toes in it. I never got around to giving serious examination to it's security. However, I don't think a large multi-billion dollar organization like MS would do something as reckless as offer cloud services with minimal security. Plus, in my poking around in Azure I saw a couple things that indicated to me that Azure resources have some serious options for security. I just never really dived into it.

[EDIT] Also forgot to mention that the connection string for connecting to an Azure SQL Database does include a password and user name and a couple other items meant to be used for security.

The point I was trying to make is that it takes very minimal effort and knowledge get started with Azure. You can then choose to research as much as you want about the platform and it's features if you feel there is something more you need, like extra security.

[jpbro]

I never got around to giving serious examination to it's security. However, I don't think a large multi-billion dollar organization like MS would do something as reckless as offer cloud services with minimal security. Plus, in my poking around in Azure I saw a couple things that indicated to me that Azure resources have some serious options for security. I just never really dived into it.

IMHO it's not about MS' cloud security (or Amazon's, or anyone else) as much as it is about making your database directly accessible over the Internet. I think there's a lot of value in having an API layer in between your database and the Internet as a general rule.

That said, being a "multi-billion dollar organization" doesn't give you security by default - in fact it may even make you a greater target for hacks. Look at the Yahoo and Equifax breaches (among others).

[EDIT] Also forgot to mention that the connection string for connecting to an Azure SQL Database does include a password and user name and a couple other items meant to be used for security.

Well I should hope so!

The point I was trying to make is that it takes very minimal effort and knowledge get started with Azure. You can then choose to research as much as you want about the platform and it's features if you feel there is something more you need, like extra security.

And choice is good, especially informed choice. Thanks for bringing up an alternative - I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, I'm just representing another possibility (and one that I don't think is particularly insane, just built upon a different experience, set of assumptions and beliefs, different starting point and desired end goals).

[Niya]

and one that I don't think is particularly insane

I wasn't trying to imply at all that the solutions you guys suggested were insane. In fact, I actually think those options are very interesting and have merit. What I felt was insane was the fact that no one offered the simplest and most direct option.

...I'm not trying to start a fight or anything...

Don't worry, it's cool

[jpbro]

Don't worry, it's cool

It's cool here too - sorry for harping on the "insane" thing - the first time I was trying to point out that I thought insane was a bit of a strong judgement, the second time I was just trying to be a bit humorous (not sure that got across). Anyway, I meant it when I thanked you for pointing out other options. It's always good to get different perspectives here.

[dreammanor]

For those who had interest in my FCGI application server, it's been extended a bit and is now on GitHub here: https://github.com/jpbro/VbFcgi

Very nice, jpbro. Thank you so much.

VB6 is an old and excellent language. Though it has no new features to make people excited, the following things are always make me look forward to:

1. Excellent third-party library for VB6, such as vbRichClient5
2. New IDE for VB6
3. Cloud database for VB6
4. Web-API for VB6
5. Fast and easy web development framework for VB6
6. Mobile development framework for VB6