Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #37281 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Clark Smith <noaddress@nowhere.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-02-26 18:52 +0000 |
| Last post | 2023-02-26 23:31 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 82 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Contents of file changed while application is reading it Clark Smith <noaddress@nowhere.net> - 2023-02-26 18:52 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2023-02-26 19:20 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2023-02-26 21:45 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-26 23:05 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-26 23:38 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-26 23:32 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2023-02-26 19:06 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-27 00:26 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2023-02-26 20:48 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-27 09:03 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-27 09:58 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-27 11:16 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-27 15:20 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-27 10:34 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-27 09:49 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-27 11:13 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-27 10:02 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-27 11:13 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-27 10:17 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2023-02-27 12:27 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-27 19:19 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-02-27 21:46 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-28 13:33 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-02-28 10:49 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-28 16:21 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-01 01:05 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-03-01 21:57 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-01 22:53 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-03-02 19:06 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-02 23:08 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-03-03 05:23 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-03 09:36 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-03-03 11:19 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-03-03 15:58 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-03-03 18:47 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2023-03-04 16:24 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-03-04 18:40 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-03 18:44 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-03-04 01:25 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2023-03-04 16:21 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28B.I874" <28B.I874@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-04 23:55 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-03-05 05:35 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> - 2023-03-05 13:48 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-05 14:01 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2023-03-05 19:16 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28B.I874" <28B.I874@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-06 00:43 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28B.I874" <28B.I874@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-06 00:42 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2023-02-28 12:01 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-01 01:17 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2023-02-28 04:13 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-28 13:16 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-01 01:32 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-01 10:30 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-01 22:48 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-02 09:41 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-02 23:39 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-03 09:28 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2023-03-03 12:16 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-04 01:36 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-04 07:15 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-04 02:47 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-04 01:12 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-04 06:51 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-04 03:32 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-04 09:54 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-04 10:09 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-04 11:22 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-04 11:58 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-05 16:43 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-06 09:20 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28B.I874" <28B.I874@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-04 20:24 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-05 13:40 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2023-03-05 11:29 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28B.I874" <28B.I874@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-06 01:21 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28B.I874" <28B.I874@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-06 01:06 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-06 09:28 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28B.I874" <28B.I874@noabzba.net> - 2023-03-06 08:54 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2023-02-26 17:35 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-26 23:39 +0000
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> - 2023-02-26 22:42 -0500
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-02-27 10:45 +0100
Re: Contents of file changed while application is reading it The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-26 23:31 +0000
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-27 19:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5q8vcjxgqm.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #37317 |
On 2023-02-27 11:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 27/02/2023 10:13, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2023-02-27 11:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 27/02/2023 09:34, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>> On 2023-02-27 01:06, David W. Hodgins wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 18:32:38 -0500, The Natural Philosopher >>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> I am pretty sure generally NO. >>>>>> Otherwise databases would have a hard time working >>>>> >>>>> Data base applications work by having one thread that does the >>>>> physical i/o for each file that contains the database. Multiple >>>>> applications can use the database, but they don't do the i/o to the >>>>> disk. >>>> >>>> Not all database applications work that way. >>>> >>>> For example, in MsDOS an application could lock for write a section >>>> of a file, write that, then remove the lock. Another application >>>> could be reading the same file, even writing in another section. >>>> >>>> This functionality was an add on: you needed to run the optional >>>> share.exe. But Windows had it natively. >>>> >>>> I believe Microsoft Access works like that. >>>> >>>> >>>> I am not sure this behaviour can be done in Linux. Long ago it could >>>> not. >>>> >>> File lockining always existed at the level of IIRC whole files. >>> But obliviously it is far far easier to have a databse engine >>> accepting all requests and using (at least) just one process, if not >>> one thread, to do all I/O >> >> Easier, depends. MS Access is trivially easy to use (for simple >> databases). >> > You call that a database? I dont. Any more than SqlLite is a > database...both are single user/process access only. LOL Well, there is money in it ;-) -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-27 21:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <E_KcnbZiKM629mD-nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #37321 |
On 2/27/23 1:19 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2023-02-27 11:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 27/02/2023 10:13, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> On 2023-02-27 11:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> On 27/02/2023 09:34, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>>> On 2023-02-27 01:06, David W. Hodgins wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 18:32:38 -0500, The Natural Philosopher >>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>> I am pretty sure generally NO. >>>>>>> Otherwise databases would have a hard time working >>>>>> >>>>>> Data base applications work by having one thread that does the >>>>>> physical i/o for each file that contains the database. Multiple >>>>>> applications can use the database, but they don't do the i/o to the >>>>>> disk. >>>>> >>>>> Not all database applications work that way. >>>>> >>>>> For example, in MsDOS an application could lock for write a section >>>>> of a file, write that, then remove the lock. Another application >>>>> could be reading the same file, even writing in another section. >>>>> >>>>> This functionality was an add on: you needed to run the optional >>>>> share.exe. But Windows had it natively. >>>>> >>>>> I believe Microsoft Access works like that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure this behaviour can be done in Linux. Long ago it >>>>> could not. >>>>> >>>> File lockining always existed at the level of IIRC whole files. >>>> But obliviously it is far far easier to have a databse engine >>>> accepting all requests and using (at least) just one process, if not >>>> one thread, to do all I/O >>> >>> Easier, depends. MS Access is trivially easy to use (for simple >>> databases). >>> >> You call that a database? I dont. Any more than SqlLite is a >> database...both are single user/process access only. > > LOL > > Well, there is money in it ;-) Access has its place and uses - and the 3rd-gen drag-n-drop form builder is something I wish they ALL had (ok, you CAN have 'em - for $$$+). Where I'm at now the inventory DB is on Access. Only one person uses it at a time anyhow and several people have been able to figure out how to tweak the forms/fields/etc a little, so ... Now for the more-used stuff ... SQL Server or (preferably) MySQL (not MariaDB). Thing is I'm pretty much the only one who can mod those and it ain't THAT long until retirement and there's no proper heir-apparent ......... (damn that work-ethic ..........)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-28 13:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <au81djx3vj.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #37324 |
On 2023-02-28 03:46, 28A.I873 wrote: > On 2/27/23 1:19 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2023-02-27 11:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 27/02/2023 10:13, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>> On 2023-02-27 11:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>> On 27/02/2023 09:34, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>>>> On 2023-02-27 01:06, David W. Hodgins wrote: >>>>>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 18:32:38 -0500, The Natural Philosopher >>>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>> I am pretty sure generally NO. >>>>>>>> Otherwise databases would have a hard time working >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Data base applications work by having one thread that does the >>>>>>> physical i/o for each file that contains the database. Multiple >>>>>>> applications can use the database, but they don't do the i/o to the >>>>>>> disk. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not all database applications work that way. >>>>>> >>>>>> For example, in MsDOS an application could lock for write a >>>>>> section of a file, write that, then remove the lock. Another >>>>>> application could be reading the same file, even writing in >>>>>> another section. >>>>>> >>>>>> This functionality was an add on: you needed to run the optional >>>>>> share.exe. But Windows had it natively. >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe Microsoft Access works like that. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not sure this behaviour can be done in Linux. Long ago it >>>>>> could not. >>>>>> >>>>> File lockining always existed at the level of IIRC whole files. >>>>> But obliviously it is far far easier to have a databse engine >>>>> accepting all requests and using (at least) just one process, if >>>>> not one thread, to do all I/O >>>> >>>> Easier, depends. MS Access is trivially easy to use (for simple >>>> databases). >>>> >>> You call that a database? I dont. Any more than SqlLite is a >>> database...both are single user/process access only. >> >> LOL >> >> Well, there is money in it ;-) > > Access has its place and uses - and the 3rd-gen drag-n-drop > form builder is something I wish they ALL had (ok, you CAN > have 'em - for $$$+). Where I'm at now the inventory DB is > on Access. Only one person uses it at a time anyhow and > several people have been able to figure out how to tweak > the forms/fields/etc a little, so ... > > Now for the more-used stuff ... SQL Server or (preferably) > MySQL (not MariaDB). Thing is I'm pretty much the only one > who can mod those and it ain't THAT long until retirement > and there's no proper heir-apparent ......... (damn that > work-ethic ..........) We used MS Access at an ISP, back on 1998, for keeping track of second level (client) incidents. The team could be 6 people using the database at the same time (both read and write). There was one "database file" in a desktop machine acting as server for the group, and then several desktop machines running the application, which was another ms access file. Sharing directories on the network. I don't remember anybody reporting glitches related to concurrent access, besides two people trying to write to the same record, but that was very rare because of how we were organized. Creating/maintaining the database and the applications/forms was trivially easy. Libre Office is getting _now_ near to what ms access did 25 years ago. We could change our MS-A database in a day, even an hour, not involving higher management. And we could obtain stats and graphs which our management loved. And MS Access was used because it was what the office people had access to (all computers were provided with a full MS Office instance), and we had people knowing it. The true enterprise database used Vantive. So yes, MS Access is indeed a serious database used in the enterprise office world. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-28 10:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n82dnezIYPQRv2P-nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #37328 |
On 2/28/23 7:33 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2023-02-28 03:46, 28A.I873 wrote: >> On 2/27/23 1:19 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> On 2023-02-27 11:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> On 27/02/2023 10:13, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>>> On 2023-02-27 11:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>> On 27/02/2023 09:34, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>>>>> On 2023-02-27 01:06, David W. Hodgins wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 18:32:38 -0500, The Natural Philosopher >>>>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>> I am pretty sure generally NO. >>>>>>>>> Otherwise databases would have a hard time working >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Data base applications work by having one thread that does the >>>>>>>> physical i/o for each file that contains the database. Multiple >>>>>>>> applications can use the database, but they don't do the i/o to the >>>>>>>> disk. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not all database applications work that way. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For example, in MsDOS an application could lock for write a >>>>>>> section of a file, write that, then remove the lock. Another >>>>>>> application could be reading the same file, even writing in >>>>>>> another section. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This functionality was an add on: you needed to run the optional >>>>>>> share.exe. But Windows had it natively. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I believe Microsoft Access works like that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am not sure this behaviour can be done in Linux. Long ago it >>>>>>> could not. >>>>>>> >>>>>> File lockining always existed at the level of IIRC whole files. >>>>>> But obliviously it is far far easier to have a databse engine >>>>>> accepting all requests and using (at least) just one process, if >>>>>> not one thread, to do all I/O >>>>> >>>>> Easier, depends. MS Access is trivially easy to use (for simple >>>>> databases). >>>>> >>>> You call that a database? I dont. Any more than SqlLite is a >>>> database...both are single user/process access only. >>> >>> LOL >>> >>> Well, there is money in it ;-) >> >> Access has its place and uses - and the 3rd-gen drag-n-drop >> form builder is something I wish they ALL had (ok, you CAN >> have 'em - for $$$+). Where I'm at now the inventory DB is >> on Access. Only one person uses it at a time anyhow and >> several people have been able to figure out how to tweak >> the forms/fields/etc a little, so ... >> >> Now for the more-used stuff ... SQL Server or (preferably) >> MySQL (not MariaDB). Thing is I'm pretty much the only one >> who can mod those and it ain't THAT long until retirement >> and there's no proper heir-apparent ......... (damn that >> work-ethic ..........) > > > We used MS Access at an ISP, back on 1998, for keeping track of second > level (client) incidents. The team could be 6 people using the database > at the same time (both read and write). There was one "database file" in > a desktop machine acting as server for the group, and then several > desktop machines running the application, which was another ms access > file. Sharing directories on the network. I don't remember anybody > reporting glitches related to concurrent access, besides two people > trying to write to the same record, but that was very rare because of > how we were organized. > > Creating/maintaining the database and the applications/forms was > trivially easy. Libre Office is getting _now_ near to what ms access did > 25 years ago. We could change our MS-A database in a day, even an hour, > not involving higher management. And we could obtain stats and graphs > which our management loved. > > And MS Access was used because it was what the office people had access > to (all computers were provided with a full MS Office instance), and we > had people knowing it. The true enterprise database used Vantive. > > So yes, MS Access is indeed a serious database used in the enterprise > office world. You don't need a nuclear weapon to swat a fly. The "big" DBs like Oracle, SQL Server, MySQL - those are just way too much work to handle a lot of trivial DB needs for a large segment. Access works. It's ubiquitous. People can figure it out. As for Libre ... they (or was it Star/Open-Office ?) used to have an Access clone. Not quite as good, but it also worked and people could cope. Then it went away. Libre's idea of a 'database' now seems to be a front-end for their spreadsheet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-28 16:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ttl9mo$27bbi$27@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #37331 |
On 28/02/2023 15:49, 28A.I873 wrote: > Access works. It's ubiquitous. People can figure it out. I never could, but the moment I looked at Informix and MySQL it all made perfect sense. -- "I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently. This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and all women"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-01 01:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <WNGdnchgFpfFdmP-nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #37332 |
On 2/28/23 11:21 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 28/02/2023 15:49, 28A.I873 wrote: >> Access works. It's ubiquitous. People can figure it out. > > I never could, but the moment I looked at Informix and MySQL it all made > perfect sense. Then you're not "regular people". Take that as a complement ... I've several NON-IT people who were able to create and tweak an inventory DB using Access.. pix of the hardware included. NONE could do it with Oracle/MySql/SQL-SERVER ... no WAY. This means that *I* don't have to worry about it, *I* don't have to tweak it, *I* don't have to maintain it. Does what it needs to do. So no, I am NOT gonna diss Access. It DOES have it's place and sphere and audience. And the built-in 3rd-gen form builder ... wonderful. IF you learn how to expand those form options you can do kinda anything. And stuff like FoxBase and FileMaker have their place too. Had to move a non-y2k MV database over to FileMaker, SO much fun, long back. Frankly I prefer the multivalue paradigm, but these days those DBs cost too damned much.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-01 21:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9TPLL.243396$Ldj8.162746@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #37336 |
On 2023-03-01, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: > I've several NON-IT people who were able to create > and tweak an inventory DB using Access.. pix of > the hardware included. NONE could do it with > Oracle/MySql/SQL-SERVER ... no WAY. This means > that *I* don't have to worry about it, *I* don't > have to tweak it, *I* don't have to maintain it. > Does what it needs to do. And they don't/can't/won't come after you when things go sideways? You're in an enviable position. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | You can't save the earth \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | unless you're willing to X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | make other people sacrifice. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Dogbert, 2007-06-20
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-01 22:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <v4ednWJZ6tlFgJ35nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #37340 |
On 3/1/23 4:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2023-03-01, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: > >> I've several NON-IT people who were able to create >> and tweak an inventory DB using Access.. pix of >> the hardware included. NONE could do it with >> Oracle/MySql/SQL-SERVER ... no WAY. This means >> that *I* don't have to worry about it, *I* don't >> have to tweak it, *I* don't have to maintain it. >> Does what it needs to do. > > And they don't/can't/won't come after you when > things go sideways? You're in an enviable position. Oddly, nothing has ever gone wrong :-) Access is "simple" enough, and old enough, to be kinda bulletproof now. It DOES have its uses. Unless you're plotting some "job security" complexities :-) I'm kinda on the way OUT ... so "job security" isn't what I'm looking for - stuff that can coast a few years ONCE I'm gone is the ethical thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-02 19:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Ms6ML.188091$Sgyc.182208@fx40.iad> |
| In reply to | #37347 |
On 2023-03-02, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: > On 3/1/23 4:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> On 2023-03-01, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: >> >>> I've several NON-IT people who were able to create >>> and tweak an inventory DB using Access.. pix of >>> the hardware included. NONE could do it with >>> Oracle/MySql/SQL-SERVER ... no WAY. This means >>> that *I* don't have to worry about it, *I* don't >>> have to tweak it, *I* don't have to maintain it. >>> Does what it needs to do. >> >> And they don't/can't/won't come after you when >> things go sideways? You're in an enviable position. > > Oddly, nothing has ever gone wrong :-) You are _very_ lucky. Whenever I'm in such a situation, along comes the User from Hell, who messes with the system, breaks it thoroughly, complains loudly, then clams up when I ask what he did. > Access is "simple" enough, and old enough, to be > kinda bulletproof now. Apparently it's also user-proof, at least in your case. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | You can't save the earth \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | unless you're willing to X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | make other people sacrifice. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Dogbert the green consultant
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "28A.I873" <28A.I873@noabzba.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-02 23:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <hp-cnWTQsqs575z5nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #37367 |
On 3/2/23 2:06 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2023-03-02, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: > >> On 3/1/23 4:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> On 2023-03-01, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: >>> >>>> I've several NON-IT people who were able to create >>>> and tweak an inventory DB using Access.. pix of >>>> the hardware included. NONE could do it with >>>> Oracle/MySql/SQL-SERVER ... no WAY. This means >>>> that *I* don't have to worry about it, *I* don't >>>> have to tweak it, *I* don't have to maintain it. >>>> Does what it needs to do. >>> >>> And they don't/can't/won't come after you when >>> things go sideways? You're in an enviable position. >> >> Oddly, nothing has ever gone wrong :-) > > You are _very_ lucky. Whenever I'm in such a situation, > along comes the User from Hell, who messes with the system, > breaks it thoroughly, complains loudly, then clams up when > I ask what he did. Heh heh ... yea, I've had a few of those - JUST enough knowledge, or perception thereof, to cause LOTS of damage. Fortunately none of them ever got ahold of that Access app. And then there are "cursed" users ... whatever they touch - software OR hardware - always breaks for no obvious reason :-) >> Access is "simple" enough, and old enough, to be >> kinda bulletproof now. > > Apparently it's also user-proof, at least in your case. The (literal) few that use/tweak it never try to get TOO deep. They mostly rely on the 'surface features' and never try to do any actual "programming" - decorate all those potential hooks. It's enough for what they're doing. Access CAN get pretty deep, fiddly detailed code. In truth it's got the POTENTIAL for almost any kind of use, but once you go THAT far you probably need another kind of database.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-03 05:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <UufML.1396916$iU59.615589@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #37370 |
On 2023-03-03, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: > And then there are "cursed" users ... whatever they > touch - software OR hardware - always breaks for no > obvious reason :-) They make great beta testers, though. If your system can survive an encounter with one of them, it's pretty much bombproof. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | You can't save the earth \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | unless you're willing to X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | make other people sacrifice. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Dogbert the green consultant
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-03 09:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ttsf2n$279gm$65@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #37370 |
On 03/03/2023 04:08, 28A.I873 wrote: > On 3/2/23 2:06 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> On 2023-03-02, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: >> >>> On 3/1/23 4:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>> >>>> On 2023-03-01, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've several NON-IT people who were able to create >>>>> and tweak an inventory DB using Access.. pix of >>>>> the hardware included. NONE could do it with >>>>> Oracle/MySql/SQL-SERVER ... no WAY. This means >>>>> that *I* don't have to worry about it, *I* don't >>>>> have to tweak it, *I* don't have to maintain it. >>>>> Does what it needs to do. >>>> >>>> And they don't/can't/won't come after you when >>>> things go sideways? You're in an enviable position. >>> >>> Oddly, nothing has ever gone wrong :-) >> >> You are _very_ lucky. Whenever I'm in such a situation, >> along comes the User from Hell, who messes with the system, >> breaks it thoroughly, complains loudly, then clams up when >> I ask what he did. > > Heh heh ... yea, I've had a few of those - JUST enough > knowledge, or perception thereof, to cause LOTS of > damage. Fortunately none of them ever got ahold of > that Access app. > When I was developing BIOS software for a PC clone, many years ago, the company employed loads of students in the vacation to fiddle around until they broke it. An excellent choice, because students have just enough knowledge to be really dangerous. On another occasion, I was called back to fix a problem in some software I had written,. The girl who was using it said 'its strange, because I used to get it a lot, but now I hardly get it at all.. That was the killer piece of information. When there was an operator error, my code went to an error handling routine that handled the error but left the current file open. DOS, being DOS then ran out of file handles after about 10 errors.... I had never tested against that.. > And then there are "cursed" users ... whatever they > touch - software OR hardware - always breaks for no > obvious reason :-) > Worse than that, is the user who knows perfectly well what he did to break it, but wont tell you because of some sort of pointless pride. I gave up helping a particular neighbour. He always lied about what had happened because he couldn't admit he didn't know what he was doing, which made it impossible to fix the mistakes. > >>> Access is "simple" enough, and old enough, to be >>> kinda bulletproof now. >> >> Apparently it's also user-proof, at least in your case. > > The (literal) few that use/tweak it never try to get > TOO deep. They mostly rely on the 'surface features' > and never try to do any actual "programming" - decorate > all those potential hooks. It's enough for what they're > doing. Access CAN get pretty deep, fiddly detailed > code. In truth it's got the POTENTIAL for almost any > kind of use, but once you go THAT far you probably > need another kind of database. Exactly so. -- The New Left are the people they warned you about.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-03 11:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <e6u8djxuiu.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #37381 |
On 2023-03-03 10:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 03/03/2023 04:08, 28A.I873 wrote: >> On 3/2/23 2:06 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>> On 2023-03-02, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 3/1/23 4:57 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2023-03-01, 28A.I873 <28A.I873@noabzba.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I've several NON-IT people who were able to create >>>>>> and tweak an inventory DB using Access.. pix of >>>>>> the hardware included. NONE could do it with >>>>>> Oracle/MySql/SQL-SERVER ... no WAY. This means >>>>>> that *I* don't have to worry about it, *I* don't >>>>>> have to tweak it, *I* don't have to maintain it. >>>>>> Does what it needs to do. >>>>> >>>>> And they don't/can't/won't come after you when >>>>> things go sideways? You're in an enviable position. >>>> >>>> Oddly, nothing has ever gone wrong :-) >>> >>> You are _very_ lucky. Whenever I'm in such a situation, >>> along comes the User from Hell, who messes with the system, >>> breaks it thoroughly, complains loudly, then clams up when >>> I ask what he did. >> >> Heh heh ... yea, I've had a few of those - JUST enough >> knowledge, or perception thereof, to cause LOTS of >> damage. Fortunately none of them ever got ahold of >> that Access app. >> > When I was developing BIOS software for a PC clone, many years ago, the > company employed loads of students in the vacation to fiddle around > until they broke it. An excellent choice, because students have just > enough knowledge to be really dangerous. > > On another occasion, I was called back to fix a problem in some software > I had written,. The girl who was using it said 'its strange, because I > used to get it a lot, but now I hardly get it at all.. > > That was the killer piece of information. When there was an operator > error, my code went to an error handling routine that handled the error > but left the current file open. DOS, being DOS then ran out of file > handles after about 10 errors.... > > I had never tested against that.. I heard of that one. Dos file handle limit. I have hit it also in Linux, recently, when opening a few firefox instances (firefox -P someprofile). After three, the last one crashed on open. > >> And then there are "cursed" users ... whatever they >> touch - software OR hardware - always breaks for no >> obvious reason :-) >> > Worse than that, is the user who knows perfectly well what he did to > break it, but wont tell you because of some sort of pointless pride. > > I gave up helping a particular neighbour. He always lied about what had > happened because he couldn't admit he didn't know what he was doing, > which made it impossible to fix the mistakes. Heh. >>>> Access is "simple" enough, and old enough, to be >>>> kinda bulletproof now. >>> >>> Apparently it's also user-proof, at least in your case. >> >> The (literal) few that use/tweak it never try to get >> TOO deep. They mostly rely on the 'surface features' >> and never try to do any actual "programming" - decorate >> all those potential hooks. It's enough for what they're >> doing. Access CAN get pretty deep, fiddly detailed >> code. In truth it's got the POTENTIAL for almost any >> kind of use, but once you go THAT far you probably >> need another kind of database. > > Exactly so. Typically, these type of tools make easy things to be real easy, but hard things become impossible. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-03 15:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <7PoML.919200$gGD7.379067@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #37382 |
On 2023-03-03, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > Typically, these type of tools make easy things to be real easy, > but hard things become impossible. I've noticed that more and more software is written this way. Apple has been the spearhead in this movement, but it's becoming quite widespread. As long as you stay in the playpen (i.e. only do the things that are pre-ordained) the system is very easy to use. But the moment you climb out of the playpen you hit a brick wall. If it's not in the menus you're out of luck, and keyboard-based alternatives are discouraged. I'd much rather have a system that's a bit harder to learn but contains more flexibility; in the long run, it's actually easier to use. (Note to designers: ease of learning and ease of use are not the same thing.) As an opportunity for thread drift, it's always been a hallmark of the User from Hell to complain in a way that's terse to the point of uselessness, i.e. "It doesn't work!" Alas, this mindset is infecting modern software developers. When an error occurs nowadays, more and more apps are display a message like "Something went wrong", without any explanation or error codes which could help the user - or developer - track down the problem. Grrrrr... -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | You can't save the earth \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | unless you're willing to X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | make other people sacrifice. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Dogbert the green consultant
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-03 18:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k6eq5eF2trkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #37385 |
On 2023-03-03 16:58, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-03-03, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Typically, these type of tools make easy things to be real easy,
>> but hard things become impossible.
>
> I've noticed that more and more software is written this way.
> Apple has been the spearhead in this movement, but it's becoming
> quite widespread. As long as you stay in the playpen (i.e. only
> do the things that are pre-ordained) the system is very easy
> to use. But the moment you climb out of the playpen you hit a
> brick wall. If it's not in the menus you're out of luck, and
> keyboard-based alternatives are discouraged. I'd much rather
> have a system that's a bit harder to learn but contains more
> flexibility; in the long run, it's actually easier to use.
> (Note to designers: ease of learning and ease of use are
> not the same thing.)
But depends on intended usage and by whom, too.
>
> As an opportunity for thread drift, it's always been a hallmark
> of the User from Hell to complain in a way that's terse to the
> point of uselessness, i.e. "It doesn't work!" Alas, this mindset
> is infecting modern software developers. When an error occurs
> nowadays, more and more apps are display a message like
> "Something went wrong", without any explanation or error
> codes which could help the user - or developer - track down
> the problem. Grrrrr...
Yak.
New camera can, among many other possibilities, "connect to computer via
router wifi". Nice. So camera finds SSID, tell password, wait...
nothing. Camera tries then gives up, no error message.
Grrr indeed.
Suspicion is it wants to find a published shared directory (on samba).
Or maybe not, camera doesn't know workgroup name or password.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-04 16:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ttvrb2$10s98$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #37387 |
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > Yak. > > New camera can, among many other possibilities, "connect to computer > via router wifi". Nice. So camera finds SSID, tell password, > wait... nothing. Camera tries then gives up, no error message. > > Grrr indeed. > > Suspicion is it wants to find a published shared directory (on > samba). Or maybe not, camera doesn't know workgroup name or > password. Much more likely, it is looking for "camera maker's app" running on the computer. And, of course, "camera maker's app" while compatible with current win ver X, will fail to install when MS moves X to X+1. And camera maker will never, ever, issue an update for win X+1 as they have now moved on to camera Y+1 and no longer care about users who still have camera Y.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-04 18:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <8eccdjx04q.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #37411 |
On 2023-03-04 17:24, Rich wrote: > Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >> Yak. >> >> New camera can, among many other possibilities, "connect to computer >> via router wifi". Nice. So camera finds SSID, tell password, >> wait... nothing. Camera tries then gives up, no error message. >> >> Grrr indeed. >> >> Suspicion is it wants to find a published shared directory (on >> samba). Or maybe not, camera doesn't know workgroup name or >> password. > > Much more likely, it is looking for "camera maker's app" running on the > computer. No, in that case they would say so in the manual. The windows tools are mentioned in another chapter. They document using wifi (with camera as hot spot) and a workgroup for transfering photos, while not mentioning the windows tools. They simply should report errors. > And, of course, "camera maker's app" while compatible with > current win ver X, will fail to install when MS moves X to X+1. And > camera maker will never, ever, issue an update for win X+1 as they have > now moved on to camera Y+1 and no longer care about users who still > have camera Y. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-03 18:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <tttf72$27bbi$53@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #37385 |
On 03/03/2023 15:58, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> As an opportunity for thread drift, it's always been a hallmark
> of the User from Hell to complain in a way that's terse to the
> point of uselessness, i.e. "It doesn't work!" Alas, this mindset
> is infecting modern software developers. When an error occurs
> nowadays, more and more apps are display a message like
> "Something went wrong", without any explanation or error
> codes which could help the user - or developer - track down
> the problem. Grrrrr...
90% of the software I encounter on line would have got me fired if I had
written it
I have recently closed two bank accounts on account of their software
and philosophy being utter shit, and their support team mindless
incompetent and powerless droids at the other end of a carrier pigeon
and wet string link VOIP link who can't actually speak standard English.
And yet there is nothinh wrong with my hearing. On two occasions
actually visiting the bank resulted in excellent service from competent
and totally comprehensible staff.
BUT they are closing all the minor branches so its a bit of a trek to
get in to see them
--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."
- Stephen Vizinczey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-04 01:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <z6xML.1438290$9sn9.654360@fx17.iad> |
| In reply to | #37389 |
On 2023-03-03, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > 90% of the software I encounter on line would have got me fired if I had > written it Yup. Sad. > I have recently closed two bank accounts on account of their software > and philosophy being utter shit, and their support team mindless > incompetent and powerless droids at the other end of a carrier pigeon > and wet string link VOIP link who can't actually speak standard English. > > And yet there is nothinh wrong with my hearing. On two occasions > actually visiting the bank resulted in excellent service from competent > and totally comprehensible staff. Recently I visited the bank to activate a new credit card. I can access my accounts online using Seamonkey (a Firefox variant), but halfway through the activation screens things got wedged. Straight Firefox didn't work any better. I went to my local branch and was lucky enough to get the supervisor. His first question was, "What browser are you using?" "Firefox," I answered. "Never heard of it," he said. (!!!) I muttered some remarks about digital racism (he looked a bit ethnic himself) and then walked him through the same activation screens on his computer (which was running Edge), and it went fine. Apparently the bank's policy is that the only browsers deserve consideration are Edge and Chrome. With a parting shot about discrimination, I left, satisfied that at least I had wasted as much of the bank's time as they had wasted mine. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | You can't save the earth \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | unless you're willing to X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | make other people sacrifice. / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Dogbert the green consultant
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-04 16:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ttvr62$10s98$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #37385 |
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2023-03-03, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Typically, these type of tools make easy things to be real easy,
>> but hard things become impossible.
>
> I've noticed that more and more software is written this way.
> Apple has been the spearhead in this movement, but it's becoming
> quite widespread. As long as you stay in the playpen (i.e. only
> do the things that are pre-ordained) the system is very easy
> to use. But the moment you climb out of the playpen you hit a
> brick wall. If it's not in the menus you're out of luck, and
> keyboard-based alternatives are discouraged.
And, more than often not, no consideration for the possibililty that
someone, somewhere, just might have a need to do one of the functions
that *is* in the menus, but want to repeat it across either plural
instances in the file being "used" or across plural files.
> When an error occurs nowadays, more and more apps are display a
> message like "Something went wrong", without any explanation or error
> codes which could help the user - or developer - track down the
> problem. Grrrrr...
Or, as is by far too common in the Python world:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
ConnectionError: Unknown failure 15
No indication of which "module", and no indication of what "15" means
-- although maybe digging down into layers of python libs and python C
extensions one might eventually find what "15" means.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web