ODBC connection to MS SQL 2000 help needed
sunshine at public.kherson.ua
Fri Mar 31 15:48:58 EST 2006
On 3/31/06 10:26 PM, "Mark Wieder" <mwieder at ahsoftware.net> wrote:
>> If you were to prioritize improvements to database access in Revolution,
>> what would you want?
> <g> Well, it's hard to find fault with stephen's response, but also...
> to put it in a nutshell, I think the functionality should match the
> marketing spiel.
> I think my number one priority would be to rewrite the external
> libraries so that odbc databases aren't opened in forward-only mode
Mark, I am not big expert of ODBC, but I remember that ODBC have few levels
of implementations. Some levels of ODBC do support only forward cursors.
This is issue of particular ODBC driver.
I agree that ODBC should die. :-)
My point of view is that it is not wise invest time into ODBC and new code
to support ODBC.
> and don't issue a new read command for each record. That's an absolute
> killer for recordset manipulation - I've tried reading a recordset
> into an array to deal with things that way and had to kill the process
> after half an hour of disk churning. It probably works for small
> databases, but anything past 4 figures of recordsets is unworkable.
If you need big database do not use ODBC access.
Big databases hard to manage even directly. So why you self setup huge
bottleneck in form of ODBC ?
Half of hour? May be you want do the same job in seconds? :-)
VP Engineering and New Technology
Paradigma Software, Inc
Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
[I feel the need: the need for speed]
More information about the Use-livecode