Page 1 of 1
WHY NOT SQLDBE like xHarbour SQLRDD ?
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 2:32 am
by unixkd
Hi all
Happy Xmas.
It is my opinion that we strongly recommend to Alaska software that they should try and hamonise everything around SQL into a single DBE just like xHarbour did with their SQL RDD instead of this current proliferations of DBEs.
What do you think ?
Thanks
Joe.
- SQLRDD.png (175.71 KiB) Viewed 9965 times
Re: WHY NOT SQLDBE like xHarbour SQLRDD ?
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 3:24 am
by Tom
The SQLRDD concept is about eleven years old (same age as PGDBE) - and it never worked really good. Just check the search results for this. Anyway, it simulates ISAM with any SQL databases, but in difference to PGDBE it should work with all SQL servers. That means on the other hand that there's no optimization on the server side, which is an adavantage of what Alaska does. I didn't find any evidences for applications working well with SQLRDD.
Re: WHY NOT SQLDBE like xHarbour SQLRDD ?
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 3:44 am
by unixkd
Hi Tom
Really ? That is serious
Now I understand
Joe
Re: WHY NOT SQLDBE like xHarbour SQLRDD ?
Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 8:54 am
by rdonnay
The SQLRDD concept is about eleven years old (same age as PGDBE)
Xbase++ has a pseudo-ISAM solution for SQL based databases.
It's called the ODBCDBE. It is also very old.
I have used it with MSSQLServer, MySQL, Advantage Server, and postGreSQL.
The ISAM implementation isn't perfect but it worked ok for the apps I worked on.
At least you get dbGoTop(), dbSkip(), dbGoBottom().
If you want SORTs or FILTERs then you just put that into the SQL statement.
I always load up an array from the dataset and then work with the array.
This way I can ASort() the array or filter it using the FILTER clause of @..DCBROWSE.