Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

[kkfin]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Today's your lucky day because they upped the max storage to 10GB for MSSQL 2012 Express - http://www.sqlmag.com/article/sql-se...ditions-143625

And this is true also with SQL Server 2008 R2 Express

[Steve Wood]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Reminds me of when I maxed out my 10MB drive with dBaseIII code.

[SNusa]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Scalability, stability, and security are three reasons for me to say that SQL tables are the way to go.
And if you are choosing dbfs because of ease of transition, make active link tables and append the dbf files to them.
I have had too many problems with indexes breaking on web apps to ever want to use dbfs again.
(by the way, is there Noel in Ancaster, Ontario?)

Jay

This sounds interesting. I'd like to see an example of this..... ( make active link tables and append the dbf files to them. )
And also, what are some of the "implications & benefits" of doing this? I presume you're referring to this?: <TBL>.APPEND()

Note: I've (thus far) only worked with a5 while using .dbf's, and am presently reviewing your "webinar videos", Jay!

[Jay Talbott]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Robert,
First, anyone who mentions a Pink Floyd album in there signature line can't be all bad, so I will attempt to answer your question.
I could make a video of what I describe, but it is fairly simple. Using the connection string, you create an active link table (in the Control Panel, right click and choose New Table, then Active Link Table.) Follow the prompts and name the active link table. This creates a dbf table with a direct link to the sql back end table.
You can manipulate the active link table like any other dbf table.
Yes, you use <tbl>.append and append records to the table. They appear in the sql back end.
Hope this helps. If not, post again.
All the best,
Jay

"Sometimes the details are "Obscured by Clouds"

[SNusa]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Robert,
First, anyone who mentions a Pink Floyd album in there signature line can't be all bad, so I will attempt to answer your question.
I could make a video of what I describe, but it is fairly simple. Using the connection string, you create an active link table (in the Control Panel, right click and choose New Table, then Active Link Table.) Follow the prompts and name the active link table. This creates a dbf table with a direct link to the sql back end table.
You can manipulate the active link table like any other dbf table.
Yes, you use <tbl>.append and append records to the table. They appear in the sql back end.
Hope this helps. If not, post again.
All the best,
Jay

"Sometimes the details are "Obscured by Clouds"

Thanks Jay..... (Good training videos too!)
Upon first reading your post: I was wondering whether there might have been a way to pre-configure a .dbf database in a way that you could instantly "remap" (relink) to a sql back-end. (Of course that's what the "up-sizer" is presumably for, which I have yet to use.)

As for the "Floyd thing" ~ they have been one of my favorites since the early 80's.

[Jay Talbott]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Robert,
Thanks for the kind words about the videos.
The upsizing is a one direction action only. It will take a dbf and make it a SQL table, but it will not create a link to that table once the table is created.
After the SQL tables exist (whether created by upsizing, or created in the back end) they can be accessed (sorry to have to use that word) by active link tables. Active like tables are like pipes between the desktop in the form of dbf tables (or pseudo-dbf tables) and the SQL tables in the back end. Records that are created, modified, or deleted in the active link tables are treated the same way in the SQL back end tables. I hope this has made things clearer, and not muddied the waters further.
Jay

[SNusa]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Robert,
Thanks for the kind words about the videos.
The upsizing is a one direction action only. It will take a dbf and make it a SQL table, but it will not create a link to that table once the table is created.
After the SQL tables exist (whether created by upsizing, or created in the back end) they can be accessed (sorry to have to use that word) by active link tables. Active like tables are like pipes between the desktop in the form of dbf tables (or pseudo-dbf tables) and the SQL tables in the back end. Records that are created, modified, or deleted in the active link tables are treated the same way in the SQL back end tables. I hope this has made things clearer, and not muddied the waters further.
Jay

Access & MDB's... (I haven't opened one of those up in quite some time.)

One quick question: I presume you have to use Alpha DAO for this to work, right?

Regarding your response, it makes perfect sense. The last time I spent a lot of time working with SQL tables and Alpha was back just prior to the "active link tables" addition to a5. (only passive read support) Things have become quite different since then, and I'm soon to be headed back down that SQL path with a5. ~ Now to make the choice between MySQL and MS.... I always thought MySQL all the way, but as of lately, I don't know. Time for a little research on this.... I think that in the end, it will all come down to system resources, the "Enterprise Manager" (or whatever they're presently referred to as respectively) & "installation invasive-ness!" ~ I guess that's not even a word, but it's one of my concerns.

As for the videos you and Steve Workings did for v.10: Access to these videos was the main reason I opted for a "charter subscription" back in 2010. ~ They've literally been the most valuable/beneficial part of the subscription thus far. I couldn't have "gotten to this point" without them.

[Jay Talbott]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Robert,
You wrote:

One quick question: I presume you have to use Alpha DAO for this to work, right?

Yes, you have to use Alpha DAO for this work.
And for my two cents worth, I really like MS SQL Server. It is the best product to come out of Redmond.
Jay

[SNusa]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Thanks Jay.

One of the concerns I have always had regarding migrating to SQL back-ends is the performance issues on the desktop side. (For that reason I had decided to avoid SQL until I dig deeper into the web side of a5.) ~ Based on your sound judgement, am I holding back unnecessarily while working on "the desktop side?" (From what I've read here on the forums, active SQL links provide very poor performance, particularly with sets. So much so, that most recommend staying with .dbf for desktop usage unless one is an XDialog guru.)

While I'm on the topic of MS SQL: Last winter I came across a new (Express) variant from MS & posted about it. Nobody at the time had any knowledge of this. It's called LocalDB. http://msgboard.alphasoftware.com/al...hlight=LocalDB

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sqlse...s/express.aspx <-- Expand the "what's new" section at page bottom to see why LocalDB may be of interest to developers.

Another later link here with no real answers:
http://msgboard.alphasoftware.com/alphaforum/showthread.php?100078-SQL-recommendation&highlight=LocalDB

With regards to this LocalDB variant of MS SQL Express: I'm wondering if this "lighter than express" (which is an option during express installation) component works with a5..... If so, it seems like it may be a viable & smart way to integrate SQL to the desktop. ~ Providing of course that active links (on the desktop) are not "too slow" to be viable.

MSDN Reference links:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh245842.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...QL.110%29.aspx

[DB_Dan]

Re: Are .DBF tables appropriate for Web/Cloud applications?

Thanks to all, you have my agreement on most of the above. Might as well pay the pain/price now then try to retrofit to SQL later and have multiples of pain/price to pay, inevitably.

Jay of whom/what are you referring to? If you mean snow, yes, but freezing rain and a warm up followed. Or Xmas, yes, there is but not for me right now :)

I have used A-5 .dbf files in "the cloud" (Zebra Host) for over a year with no troubles whatsoever. Wisht I had started with SQL first and "paid the price" early on. I have to use MS-Abcess to make SQL queries for my users. Now I am afraid to try to switch from .dbf to SQL mid stream.