简单的成员资格提供VS通用VS code-第一 [英] Simple Membership Provider vs Universal vs Code-First

问题描述

我想问一下是betweeen从SQL Server精简的角度来看这三款成员资格提供差异。至于我，因为我看到了他们的前两个可以巧合我想通过设计，第三个使用紧凑型服务器，因为实体框架。那么，有没有其实什么区别呢？

I would like to ask what is difference betweeen this three membership providers from SQL Server Compact perspective. As far I as I saw first two of them can use compact server by design and third one by coincidence I guess, because of entity framework. So, is there any difference in fact?

推荐答案

不同的是通用几乎是一样的原始与SQL精简和Azure的补充支持。简单的成员是有点简单，有一些额外的现代化实现比如基于令牌密码重置和ASP.NET网页的伟大工程。两者都是通过使用SQL准系统，并有笨重的表结构写的。 code-第一是写在EF因此可以支持多个数据库，它简化多一点，因为它只能在1个网站（以我目前的实现）采用了简洁的表这是易于扩展。 code-首先提供了更好的体验prograiming

Difference is Universal is nearly the same as original with added support for SQL Compact and Azure. Simple membership is a bit simplified, has a few additional modern implementations like token based password resets and works great with ASP.NET Webpages. Both are written by using barebone SQL and have clunky table structures. Code-first is written in EF therefore it supports more databases, it is simplified a bit more as it can only be used on 1 site (in my current implementation) has neater tables which are easily extendable. Code-first provides a better prograiming experience.

由Se3ker答案

这篇关于简单的成员资格提供VS通用VS code-第一的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！