I wonder why Roger is waisting his time on the so call pgdbe
I will let you know when I feel like I am wasting my time.
I have 6 more weeks to evaluate PostGreSql, PGDBE, the client's application and commitment, and Alaska's commitment before I recommend PGDBE as a short-term solution, a long -term solution, or no solution.
In my programming career, I have had many experiences of when I had to face reality.
25 years ago, many people said that Xbase++ was a dead end, and also ADSDBE.
After Clipper 5.2, it took me very little time to realize that Visual Basic, Clipper 5.3, Visual Objects, and many others were a waste of time when needing to migrate large Clipper projects to Windows.
I also stay clear from as many 3rd-party products as I can. I will use them, temporarily, until Alaska provides a better solution.
This was true for Xb2net, JazzAge ActiveX, and others that were retired over time.
If I can do the job with 100% Xbase++ and a few ActiveX controls I find that I am always more successful and productive, in the end, and it will not lead my clients down a rabbit hole.
The Medallion program has been running successfully, managing New York City taxis, for over 25 years with no downtime due to Xbase++ or ADSDBE failures.
The New York Court system has been running 1200 Municipal courts using an Xbase++ / eXpress++ for over 25 years.
Now they are needing a robust Client/server solution and are wanting me to evaluate PostGreSQL and PGDBE.
So far, I have seen no deal breakers. Upsizing existing data at 1200 locations does not look like it will be a problem but may be a challenge.
If I have to bypass DbfUpsize on some of the tables, I will do it in 100% Xbase++ code.
As far as wasting time is concerned, I know whom, on this forum, has been a waste of my time.