11-21-2009 07:13 AM
12-04-2009 10:35 AM
I can understand your reluctance to write a .net application to interface with Act, especially if you are new to .Net development. The only real problem with writing to SQL directly, even assuming your code is 100% correct in terms of every table and entry that has to be updated, you have to check that code, and test it, after _every_ Act update, in case the Database Schema changed in an unexpected way. That fact alone, in my opinion at least, makes such an approach massively annoying from a developers' standpoint, I'm way too lazy to do that, and it's way too easy to corrupt the database to the point that the Act application itself, can't resolve the problems that have been created.
As far as performance goes, using the SDK is actually pretty fast, especially when you access a database using the Framework (outside of the Act application, as I suspect your product would). We've written products that import, and export, hundreds of thousands of records using the SDK without performance issues (I wish other products, including to be un-named accounting solutions) had interfaces as fast as Act does.
The only real downside to .Net (other then learning it in the first place) that bothers me, is the need to purchase software to obfusticate your code after it's been "compiled". I know this really doesn't answer your question in any meaningful way, but trust me, the SDK is easier =)
12-04-2009 10:57 AM
02-13-2012 10:24 AM
02-22-2012 07:19 AM
Its really not advisable to INSERT directly into the SQL backend since its quite a complex schema especially for Activities, additionally it is against the EULA currently to do that kind of manipulation.
You would be better off doing that kind of thing via the SDK.