Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

[Al Buchholz]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

Al,
Have you ever had a script close a table without having to explicitly close it? Cause I think I've got some timeshares you might be interested in... Hee hee hee

Yes. That is part of the Alpha magic. It does somethings for you when you 'forget'.

And thanks I've already have had my share of timeshares.

[MoGrace]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

Al,
Have you ever had a script close a table without having to explicitly close it? Cause I think I've got some timeshares you might be interested in... Hee hee hee

[Al Buchholz]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

as far as the documentation, you are not supposed to use table.open and table.close methods with this function.

if you are opening and closing why bother using this function,
i am not sure there is any advantage.

As the docs say...

Note : The RECORD_ADD() function opens and closes the table.

So the function is opening and closing the table itself. That's why is says:

You should not use TABLE.OPEN() or TABLE.CLOSE().

You can open a table and use the <tbl>.presist()

Normally, when a script ends, Alpha Five will automatically close any open tables. The <TBL>.PERSIST() method can keep the table open after the script ends, so that a subsequent script can access the table without the overhead of having to open it again.

[MoGrace]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

Ghandhi,
I am speaking about TWO tables, one already open as the source for mapping FROM in the string (right side) and the other I open as the target using this function (left side). That is why I asked how the mapping ought to look inside the string if I want to use this function. Assume t = table.current()

@ Stan: good!

@ Al : but this should be fast too since it is only one record being added.

As soon as I get the double click event in my browse functioning again, I am going to try it.

[Stan Mathews]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

Not as easy as I thought. You need to do variable substitution to get actual values into the expression.

t.fname = "Tom   "
t.lname = "Johnson     "
t.address1 = "123 Pine Ct     "
cs = <<%str%
#name = t.Fname + t.Lname
#addr1 = t.address1
#%str%
? cs
= name = t.Fname + t.Lname
addr1 = t.address1

cs1 =  strtran(cs,"t.Fname",t.fname)
cs2 = strtran(cs1,"t.Lname",t.lname)
cs3 = strtran(cs2,"t.address1",t.address1)
cs4 = strtran(cs3,"+","")
? cs4
= name = Tom     Johnson     
addr1 = 123 Pine Ct

[GGandhi]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

as far as the documentation, you are not supposed to use table.open and table.close methods with this function.

if you are opening and closing why bother using this function,
i am not sure there is any advantage.

[Al Buchholz]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

FWIW

Opening and closing tables is one of the prime reasons for slowness. This is exacerbated when connecting over a network.

Sequential reading of tables is another. - especially over a network...

Using some of the pre-built xbasic functions will open and close the table for each record add.

Writing your own function and keeping the table(s) open will improve performance a lot.

I like to use the append operation because it passes control to a c++ routine that is very fast if the filter for the transaction table is efficient.

Which leads us to avoiding the network flow of data by using a RDP or other remote connection (TSPlus) to really improves performance and reliability.

[MoGrace]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

Yes of course these type scripts always work when you supply the value directly. But how does the string look if you want to map the fields from an open table or from form fields? Would it be like this?

- mapped from open table:
cs = <<%str%
name = t.Fname + t.Lname
addr1 = t.address1
...
%str%

-mapped from open form
cs = <<%str%
name = Fname.value + Lname.value
addr1 = address1.value
...
%str%

Cause if Record_Add() works like that - it will be my next favorite function!

[GGandhi]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

dim cs as c
cs = <<%STR%
#id =
#name=gandhi
#address=33 east end avenue
#city=new york
#state=ny
#zipcode=10028
#%STR%

record_add("customer",cs)

dim cs2 as c
cs2=<<%STR%
#gandhi
#33 east end avenue 2A
#new york
#ny
#10028
#%STR%



record_add("customer", cs,1)

these two seems to work ok.

[GGandhi]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

there are two options
1> the data with the field name in a crlf format auto increment field should be left blank
2> the data only
that is what i understand.

[MoGrace]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

https://www.alphasoftware.com/docume...ction1_Setting the Style

same thing in more readable form.

That example is somewhat better but it still doesn't explain how style 1 works

[MikeData]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

Since the field names are the same, as Robin's pointer suggestion but populate it with one command (even if not all the fields exist)

dim src as p  'pointer var
source.get_record(src)
target.enter_record(src)

This looks good for cases with same field names. In this case were not.
Thanks

[Stan Mathews]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

The field names are not the same per post #4.

[Ray in Capetown]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

Since the field names are the same, as Robin's pointer suggestion but populate it with one command (even if not all the fields exist)

dim src as p  'pointer var
source.get_record(src)
target.enter_record(src)

[GGandhi]

Re: Updating table takes 5 sec in a local PC setup.

https://www.alphasoftware.com/docume...ction1_Setting the Style

same thing in more readable form.