SqlClient VS ASP.NET Core

I will be using Dapper - a simple object mapper for .Net along with Microsoft.Data.Sql.

See the link https://github.com/dotnet/SqlClient/issues/1656

Where I'm having trouble is with this android device connecting to the local sql database at that store. I initially tried connecting directly to the db but ran into this error SQL Server pre-login handshake failed Android 5,6,8.1 · Issue #1656 · dotnet/SqlClient (github.com) - which the only workaround seems to be a dodgy way of turning off security (the DangerousClassProvider class at the bottom of the page). This does actually work but doesn't seem the best way.

I was doing some simple internal tooling with EF. You know the deal, toss in a new row into a table to do something or other, simple CRUD stuff. I was making it in WASM just for the sake of trying out the framework. Turns out this is a thing: https://github.com/dotnet/SqlClient/issues/599 , which prevents EF from running. The wiki page being referenced is gone though, so I don't know the reason why it'd be incompatible. To me it doesn't make that much sense, since a console application would be functionally the same, just outside a browser.

Is any of the columns varchar(max) or similar type? There is a known issue in SqlClient package affecting async reading of such columns.

Code samples for Json.net which as of version 13.0.2 now supports DateOnly and TimeOnly. Three code samples are used to show interactions with Bogus and Microsoft.Data.SqlClient which is most likely used to work with json data.

If you're connecting to SQL Server, connection pooling can be a common cause of apparent memory leaks. If you're opening and closing hundreds of connections, the pool may not be disposing of the connections quickly enough. Or you might be running into issues like this one. You might want to look at SqlConnection.ClearAllPools or SqlConnection.ClearPool or simply disabling connection pooling entirely in the connection string.

Really frustrating to see the amount of effort that went in to gaming those benchmarks when catastrophic performance issues in core Microsoft-authored libraries go unfixed for years. https://github.com/dotnet/SqlClient/issues/593

Until you trip over this https://github.com/dotnet/SqlClient/issues/593

This approach to organizing middleware enhances code readability, maintainability, and reusability. By following this encapsulation pattern, you're adhering to best practices in ASP.NET Core development, ensuring your application remains well-organized and scalable.

🌟.NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET 9 Preview 2 Discussion ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 Release Notes ➡️EF Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET Aspire preview 4 - .NET Aspire

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/50643

Even if you look at Microsoft’s by far most popular GitHub project, they’re still only half as big as SupaBase. If you believe “the SupaBase story”, SupaBase grew and became twice as large as Microsoft in 3 years. Below is their likes over time if you’re curious, together with a couple of additional “too good to be true” Silicon Valley projects.

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/10117

To achieve these objectives, we will take inspiration from ASP.NET Core Identity's PasswordHasher class. It incorporates a concept of hash versioning, allowing only the number of iterations to be modified.

yes I watched several courses, may be aim not getting clearly. but i worked with asp.net which uses http call and firebase cloud function also which uses socket connection, for socket connection its makes sense to use observable bcoz there streams of data we can observe once the connection establish ,but for http it need to be call every time.

As I'm not utilizing ASP.NET, despite its resource-intensive nature and occasional unpredictability, I prefer the cost-free option. I'm hesitant to invest in EPPlus or engage in trials, and moreover, I am more proficient with Interop. Given the limited volume of records in my department, there's a preference for utilizing tools covered by our existing license. This avoids the need for navigating through layers of approval within the chain of command and ensures compliance with our contractual agreements and Microsoft's patch management, ultimately aligning with a cost-saving mindset.