When to use RDLC over RDL reports?

user_7922 0
Viewed 139242

I have been studying SSRS 2005 / 2008 in the past weeks and have created some server side reports. For some application, a colleague suggested that I look into RDLC for that particular situation. I am now trying to get my head around the main difference between RDL and RDLC.

Searching for this information yields fragmented information at best. I have learned that:

  • RDLC reports do not store information about how to get data.
  • RDLC reports can be executed directly by the ReportViewer control.

But I still don't fully understand the relation between the RDLC file and the other related systems (the Reporting Server, the source database, the client).

In order to get a good grasp on RDLC files, I would like to know how their use differs from RDL files and in what situation one would choose RDLC over RDL. Links to resources are also welcome.

Update:

A thread on the ASP.NET forums discusses this same issue. From it, I have gained some better understanding on the issue.

A feature of RDLC is that it can be run completely client-side in the ReportViewer control.

  • This removes the need for a Reporting Services instance, and even removes the need for any database connection whatsoever, but:
  • It adds the requirement that the data that is needed in the report has to be provided manually.

Whether this is an advantage or a disadvantage depends on the particular application.

In my application, an instance of Reporting Services is available anyway and the required data for the reports can easily be pulled from a database. Is there any reason left for me to consider RDLC, or should I simply stick with RDL?

rdl rdlc reporting-services
10 Answers

I have always thought the different between RDL and RDLC is that RDL are used for SQL Server Reporting Services and RDLC are used in Visual Studio for client side reporting. The implemenation and editor are almost identical. RDL stands for Report Defintion Language and RDLC Report Definition Language Client-side.

I hope that helps.

user_1197820

From my experience, if you need high performance (this does depend slightly on your client specs) on large reports, go with rdlc. Additionally, rdlc reports give you a very full range of control over your data, you may be able to save yourself wasted database trips, etc. by using client side reports. On the project I'm currently working on, a critical report requires about 2 minutes to render on the server side, and pretty much takes out whichever reporting server it hits for that time. Switching it to client side rendering, we see performance much closer to 20-40 seconds with no load on the report server and less bandwidth used because only the datasets are being downloaded.

Your mileage may vary, and I find rdlc's add development and maintenance complexity, especially when your report has been designed as a server side report.

user_1214950

If you have a reporting services infrastructure available to you, use it. You will find RDL development to be a bit more pleasant. You can preview the report, easily setup parameters, etc.

user_1160960

For VS2008, I believe RDL gives you better editing features than RDLC. For example, I can change the Bold on a selected amount of text in a textbox with RDL, while in RDLC it's is not possible.

RDL: abcd efgh ijklmnop

RDLC: abcd efgh ijklmnop -or- abcd efgh ijklmnop (are your only options)

This is because RDLC is using a earlier namespace/formatting from 2005, while RDL is using 2008. This however will change with VS2010

user_87370
Related