Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #178202 > unrolled thread

A minimal relational database in Debian?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  A minimal relational database in Debian? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-02-27 14:20 +0100
    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2017-02-27 14:30 +0100
      Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-02-27 15:20 +0100
      Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-02-27 15:50 +0100
      Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 03:40 +0100
    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? James Allsopp <jamesaallsopp@googlemail.com> - 2017-02-27 14:50 +0100
    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-02-27 14:50 +0100
      A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?] Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-02-27 16:00 +0100
        Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in  Debian?] Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-02-27 16:50 +0100
          Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?] Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-02-27 17:50 +0100
            Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in  Debian?] sunrise <sunrise@emypeople.net> - 2017-02-27 21:20 +0100
              Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?] GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-02-27 21:50 +0100
              Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?] Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 03:40 +0100
            Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-02-27 21:50 +0100
              Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?] Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-02-28 03:50 +0100
                Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?] conover@rahul.net (John Conover) - 2017-02-28 04:40 +0100
    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2017-02-27 19:10 +0100
    an answer plus minimal font size (was: A minimal relational  database in Debian? songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2017-02-27 20:50 +0100
    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2017-02-28 01:10 +0100
      Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-02-28 04:00 +0100
    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 03:40 +0100
      Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Dominic Knight <dominicknight@gmx.com> - 2017-03-01 00:30 +0100
        Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-01 00:50 +0100
          Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@web.de> - 2017-03-01 09:10 +0100
            Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-03-01 10:50 +0100
            font sizes in LibreOffice (was Re: A minimal relational database in  Debian) Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-03-01 12:20 +0100
            Re: A minimal relational database in Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-03-01 13:40 +0100
              Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-01 14:50 +0100
                Contributing [was: A minimal relational database in Debian] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-03-01 15:00 +0100
                Re: A minimal relational database in Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-01 15:10 +0100
                Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2017-03-01 15:20 +0100
                Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2017-03-01 15:50 +0100
                Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-03-01 16:10 +0100
                  Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-01 16:50 +0100
                    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-03-01 17:40 +0100
            Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-01 13:40 +0100
              Re: bad LibreOffice font sizes (was: A minimal relational data...) Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2017-03-01 14:10 +0100
              Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Bob Weber <bobrweber@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 15:20 +0100
                Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-01 16:00 +0100
                  Re: A minimal relational database in Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-03-01 21:40 +0100
                    Re: A minimal relational database in Debian GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-03-03 09:50 +0100
                      Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-03-03 10:50 +0100
                        Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-03 19:00 +0100
                          Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-03-03 22:00 +0100
                      Re: A minimal relational database in Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-03-03 11:20 +0100
                        Re: A minimal relational database in Debian Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-03-03 12:50 +0100
          Re: A minimal relational database in Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-03-01 10:40 +0100
          Re: A minimal relational database in Debian GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-03-01 10:40 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#178202 — A minimal relational database in Debian?

The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using 
dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine.
What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?

I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help" system 
provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible size.

https://packages.debian.org/stable/database/ was not useful as it 
doesn't categorize the list.

Suggestions?
TIA

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#178204

On 02/27/2017 02:17 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using
> dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine. What is a functional equivalent in the
> Debian repository?

Well, I've never used DBaseII, but if you want a small relational
database, take a look at SQLite. There are bindings into most
languages and there's a command line client. The storage is simple
(from an end-user perspective): each database is just a different
file. There's also a GUI called 'sqlitebrowser' which is in Debian,
but I've never used that. There are also other GUIs out there not
part of Debian, which you can install manually.

> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help" system
> provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible size.

No idea about LibreOffice Base, and I don't remember ever opening
the help window in LibreOffice, but often [Ctrl] + [+] will help
increase font sizes.

Regards,
Christian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178207

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 02:28:44PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> Well, I've never used DBaseII, but if you want a small relational
> database, take a look at SQLite. There are bindings into most
> languages and there's a command line client. The storage is simple
> (from an end-user perspective): each database is just a different
> file. There's also a GUI called 'sqlitebrowser' which is in Debian,
> but I've never used that.

Another vote for SQLite. "sqlitebrowser" is pretty good, IMHO, not
great but useful.


-- 
Jonathan Dowland

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178208

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 02:28:44PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> On 02/27/2017 02:17 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using
> > dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine. What is a functional equivalent in the
> > Debian repository?
> 
> Well, I've never used DBaseII, but if you want a small relational
> database, take a look at SQLite. There are bindings into most
> languages and there's a command line client. The storage is simple
> (from an end-user perspective): each database is just a different
> file. There's also a GUI called 'sqlitebrowser' which is in Debian,
> but I've never used that. There are also other GUIs out there not
> part of Debian, which you can install manually.

SQLite for really minimal, PostgreSQL for everything else. 

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178242

On Monday 27 February 2017 13:28:44 Christian Seiler wrote:
> often [Ctrl] + [+] will help
> increase font sizes.

Not in this case.

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178205

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

+1 for Sqlite unless you need multiuser access.
James

On 27 February 2017 at 13:17, Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using dBaseII
> on a MS-DOS machine.
> What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?
>
> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help" system
> provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible size.
>
> https://packages.debian.org/stable/database/ was not useful as it doesn't
> categorize the list.
>
> Suggestions?
> TIA
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178206

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 07:17:56AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using
> dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine.

Hm. A strange "relational" database indeed...

> What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?
> 
> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help"
> system provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible
> size.

LibreOffice Base is, AFAIK *not* a relational database, but just
a -possibly graphical- user interface to one. Relational databases,
as I know them, have no "fonts", for example.

Sorry for sounding somewhat snarky, but I'm trying to help you refine
your requirements. What is it exactly what you are looking for?

 - some kind of dBase clone (in a very loose sense), i.e. some
   GUI where you can click together small data-centric GUI apps?
   "Relational", perhaps "concurrent multi-user" not so important?

   I have to defer to others in this one. But perhaps you might
   want to look into gambas (for which you'd need a "real" database
   beneath, see below)

 - a "relational" [1] database with transactions, SQL, perhaps some
   concurrent multi-user capabilities?

   Here, you could do significantly worse than PostgreSQL. Highly
   recommended. Or, if you want to embed it into applications and
   don't care about multi-user (and many other niceties), you
   might want to look into sqlite. Then there is MariaDB (which
   was formerly spelled MySQL, but Oracle). Others will disagree,
   but my take is: don't if you don't have to.

(The first class of applications might contain one of the second
class as embedded data store -- or it might not).

What does you use case look like, approximately?

Regards

[1] Yeah: absolute purists will say most SQL databases out there
   are not relational, and they'd be right

- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAli0LQUACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYRqQCfQoF10Q4ZvLzLEP5u2y9dVJPK
uWoAniS+XnG6uKqkKWSwjYieYTgFW9xe
=l5rv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178211 — A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

On 02/27/2017 07:43 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 07:17:56AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using
>> dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine.

An IBM PC-XT IIRC

>
> Hm. A strange "relational" database indeed...

It is dated (obsolete for decades), but why "strange". It development 
was apparently contemporaneous with SQL, but unrelated.

>
>> What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?
>>
>> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help"
>> system provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible
>> size.
>
> LibreOffice Base is, AFAIK *not* a relational database, but just
> a -possibly graphical- user interface to one. Relational databases,
> as I know them, have no "fonts", for example.

I didn't claim it was ;/
I looked at it as it was install by default when I chose MATE as my DE.
The "font problem" was that I could not force its "help system" to use a 
legible font size. Not being able to read its "help", I have ABSOLUTELY 
NO idea of what capability it does/doesn't supply.

>
> Sorry for sounding somewhat snarky, but I'm trying to help you refine
> your requirements.

No problem. I was using a definition I learned in the 1980's.

> What is it exactly what you are looking for?

I accept as satisfactory the definition given at 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_database .

>
>  - some kind of dBase clone (in a very loose sense), i.e. some
>    GUI where you can click together small data-centric GUI apps?
>    "Relational", perhaps "concurrent multi-user" not so important?
>
>    I have to defer to others in this one. But perhaps you might
>    want to look into gambas (for which you'd need a "real" database
>    beneath, see below)
>
>  - a "relational" [1] database with transactions, SQL, perhaps some
>    concurrent multi-user capabilities?
>
>    Here, you could do significantly worse than PostgreSQL. Highly
>    recommended. Or, if you want to embed it into applications and
>    don't care about multi-user (and many other niceties), you
>    might want to look into sqlite. Then there is MariaDB (which
>    was formerly spelled MySQL, but Oracle). Others will disagree,
>    but my take is: don't if you don't have to.
>
> (The first class of applications might contain one of the second
> class as embedded data store -- or it might not).
>
> What does you use case look like, approximately?
>
> Regards
>
> [1] Yeah: absolute purists will say most SQL databases out there
>    are not relational, and they'd be right
>
> - -- tomás
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAli0LQUACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYRqQCfQoF10Q4ZvLzLEP5u2y9dVJPK
> uWoAniS+XnG6uKqkKWSwjYieYTgFW9xe
> =l5rv
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178215 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 08:53:30 -0600
Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

> On 02/27/2017 07:43 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
> >
> > LibreOffice Base is, AFAIK *not* a relational database, but just
> > a -possibly graphical- user interface to one. Relational databases,
> > as I know them, have no "fonts", for example.  
> 
> I didn't claim it was ;/
> I looked at it as it was install by default when I chose MATE as my
> DE. The "font problem" was that I could not force its "help system"
> to use a legible font size. Not being able to read its "help", I have
> ABSOLUTELY NO idea of what capability it does/doesn't supply.
> 

It's sort of functionally nearly equivalent to MS Access on Windows 3
i.e. 1992-ish. It's slow and as buggy as hell. It can't handle update
queries. I think it still needs Java for reporting. Apart from that,
it's about the quickest way to assemble an ad-hoc database application.
Free, that is, there are probably better commercial products. I use it
for this reason, but also that it is cross-platform, you can literally
take a Base file from a Linux machine and run it on a Windows machine,
and vice versa (for close-numbered versions of LO).

But a lot depends on what you want to do. Only you know your actual
database needs. LO Base can use an internal database file or pretty
much any client-server database or other ODBC server. For making user
applications, it's worth considering.

For actual storage of data in related tables, as others have said,
there is sqlite (single file) and a few client-server SQL databases.
Note that if you are aware of MS SQL Server, and that it is a humungous
beast that needs its own powerful server hardware, MySQL and Postgresql
can use orders of magnitude fewer resources, and don't cause much of a
problem when running on a workstation. I resisted running an SQL server
on my home server for some years, but when it became unavoidable, I
found that it didn't really need much care and feeding.

But you then do the work of getting the data in and out and presenting
it usefully. Perl, PHP, lazarus, python and all the other languages have
database libraries, but you may have some heavy programming to do.
Lazarus contains visual data components like the Delphi ones, and can
make database handling a bit easier, as well as visual application
development. There are database admin programs which allow useful data
manipulation, but you wouldn't give them to a user. Every now and then
I look around, and I still haven't found a free database application
developer better than LO Base. For all its faults.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178217 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

On 02/27/2017 09:44 AM, Joe wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 08:53:30 -0600
> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>
>> On 02/27/2017 07:43 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> LibreOffice Base is, AFAIK *not* a relational database, but just
>>> a -possibly graphical- user interface to one. Relational databases,
>>> as I know them, have no "fonts", for example.
>>
>> I didn't claim it was ;/
>> I looked at it as it was install by default when I chose MATE as my
>> DE. The "font problem" was that I could not force its "help system"
>> to use a legible font size. Not being able to read its "help", I have
>> ABSOLUTELY NO idea of what capability it does/doesn't supply.
>>
>
> It's sort of functionally nearly equivalent to MS Access on Windows 3
> i.e. 1992-ish.

I had forgotten about MS Access, probably 'cause the less I think about 
that employer the better. It was later than dBaseII but aimed pretty 
much at the same market. Having used dBaseII was considered "qualifying 
experience" for the job.

> It's slow and as buggy as hell. It can't handle update
> queries. I think it still needs Java for reporting. Apart from that,
> it's about the quickest way to assemble an ad-hoc database
> application.
> Free, that is, there are probably better commercial products. I use it
> for this reason, but also that it is cross-platform, you can literally
> take a Base file from a Linux machine and run it on a Windows machine,
> and vice versa (for close-numbered versions of LO).
>
> But a lot depends on what you want to do. Only you know your actual
> database needs. LO Base can use an internal database file or pretty
> much any client-server database or other ODBC server. For making user
> applications, it's worth considering.

Not if it throws barriers between me ant its documentation.

>
> For actual storage of data in related tables, as others have said,
> there is sqlite (single file) and a few client-server SQL databases.
> Note that if you are aware of MS SQL Server, and that it is a
> humungous
> beast that needs its own powerful server hardware, MySQL and
> Postgresql
> can use orders of magnitude fewer resources, and don't cause much of a
> problem when running on a workstation. I resisted running an SQL server
> on my home server for some years, but when it became unavoidable, I
> found that it didn't really need much care and feeding.
>
> But you then do the work of getting the data in and out and presenting
> it usefully. Perl, PHP, lazarus, python and all the other languages have
> database libraries, but you may have some heavy programming to do.
> Lazarus contains visual data components like the Delphi ones, and can
> make database handling a bit easier, as well as visual application
> development. There are database admin programs which allow useful data
> manipulation, but you wouldn't give them to a user. Every now and then
> I look around, and I still haven't found a free database application
> developer better than LO Base. For all its faults.
>

I installed sqlitebrowser and looked at one set of sqlite files that was 
on of the triggers causing my current questions. It doesn't appear to 
match me. But it's looking hopeful that sqlite may be useful.

A little research indicates that Tcl/Tk plays well with sqlite. A couple 
of years ago I started learning it for a now abandoned project. I'll 
follow up on that combo. [I looked at some code fragments on 
http://wiki.tcl.tk . They were reminiscent of what I did in dBaseII so 
may be a productive path.]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178231 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:46:16 -0600
Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

>On 02/27/2017 09:44 AM, Joe wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 08:53:30 -0600
>> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/27/2017 07:43 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> LibreOffice Base is, AFAIK *not* a relational database, but just
>>>> a -possibly graphical- user interface to one. Relational databases,
>>>> as I know them, have no "fonts", for example.
>>>
>>> I didn't claim it was ;/
>>> I looked at it as it was install by default when I chose MATE as my
>>> DE. The "font problem" was that I could not force its "help system"
>>> to use a legible font size. Not being able to read its "help", I have
>>> ABSOLUTELY NO idea of what capability it does/doesn't supply.
>>>
>>
>> It's sort of functionally nearly equivalent to MS Access on Windows 3
>> i.e. 1992-ish.
>
>I had forgotten about MS Access, probably 'cause the less I think about 
>that employer the better. It was later than dBaseII but aimed pretty 
>much at the same market. Having used dBaseII was considered "qualifying 
>experience" for the job.
>
>> It's slow and as buggy as hell. It can't handle update
>> queries. I think it still needs Java for reporting. Apart from that,
>> it's about the quickest way to assemble an ad-hoc database
>> application.
>> Free, that is, there are probably better commercial products. I use it
>> for this reason, but also that it is cross-platform, you can literally
>> take a Base file from a Linux machine and run it on a Windows machine,
>> and vice versa (for close-numbered versions of LO).
>>
>> But a lot depends on what you want to do. Only you know your actual
>> database needs. LO Base can use an internal database file or pretty
>> much any client-server database or other ODBC server. For making user
>> applications, it's worth considering.
>
>Not if it throws barriers between me ant its documentation.

In LibreOffice Help, try scrolling with the mouse wheel while holding 'Ctrl'; on my
system the font size can be increased and decreased across a wide range.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178234 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

Copied from a friend that dealt with such antiquities

> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:46:16 -0600
> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>> On 02/27/2017 09:44 AM, Joe wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 08:53:30 -0600
>>> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>>>> On 02/27/2017 07:43 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>>>>> LibreOffice Base is, AFAIK *not* a relational database, but just
>>>>> a -possibly graphical- user interface to one. Relational databases,
>>>>> as I know them, have no "fonts", for example.
>>>> I didn't claim it was ;/
>>>> I looked at it as it was install by default when I chose MATE as my
>>>> DE. The "font problem" was that I could not force its "help system"
>>>> to use a legible font size. Not being able to read its "help", I have
>>>> ABSOLUTELY NO idea of what capability it does/doesn't supply.
>>> It's sort of functionally nearly equivalent to MS Access on Windows 3
>>> i.e. 1992-ish.
>> I had forgotten about MS Access, probably 'cause the less I think about 
>> that employer the better. It was later than dBaseII but aimed pretty 
>> much at the same market. Having used dBaseII was considered "qualifying 
>> experience" for the job.

Back around and before that time I use to play around with dbases using
.csv files
Then at a job they had huge datasets acquired that we only needed
tables/statistics or small portions of this data.  At that time the
equipment at work were XT-at-DX-DX2 ....  while at school we worked on
DEC-mainframes and some early SUN and SGI workstations.
After I convinced them to make an exception to the isolation rule and
hand me a modem so I can submit data to be cranched elsewhere and
processed by SPSS I could take the day off and get 10hrs of work done in
30' which unless I was paid for 10 I wouldn't do.
So finally they got me the first 386 in the building with windows and
Alpha4 to process all the dbf files.  Alpha4 on DOS worked a zillion
times faster than Excell which had to use video memmory to show the
dataset and that took for ages to do.  I had the only PC that had
windows and insisted in running on DOS.  Out of romantic memory interest
if I found a copy of Alpha4 today I would get it.  Down the street a
collaborating organization run SGI workstations and early SQL, that was
fun visiting like geeks at the MS people.
Then Access came out and I QUIT!!
Eventually both SPSS and SAS moved to sell MS windows products and if
they are not dead they deserve to.
But there is no such thing as fully relational database, it is all
partial.  Anything that is not SQL based today is just as competitive as
cavemen would be against drones.
Even LibOffice can import .csv and .dbf files and make a more effective
database and data handling.  It all has to do with sizes.  GIS systems
and I am sure certain nosuchagencies may be using the most complex and
efficient dbase systems, but files of a few megabytes can be handled by
loffice

>>> It's slow and as buggy as hell. It can't handle update
>>> queries. I think it still needs Java for reporting. Apart from that,
>>> it's about the quickest way to assemble an ad-hoc database
>>> application.
>>> Free, that is, there are probably better commercial products. I use it
>>> for this reason, but also that it is cross-platform, you can literally
>>> take a Base file from a Linux machine and run it on a Windows machine,
>>> and vice versa (for close-numbered versions of LO).
>>> But a lot depends on what you want to do. Only you know your actual
>>> database needs. LO Base can use an internal database file or pretty
>>> much any client-server database or other ODBC server. For making user
>>> applications, it's worth considering.
>> Not if it throws barriers between me ant its documentation.

The bottom line is, if you worked with datasets back then, where a
spreadsheet was an ascii comma delimited file, and related several of
them into one system you can learn mySql in a 10th of the time it would
take a non-mathematician to learn.

-- 
 "The most violent element in society is ignorance" rEG

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178241 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

On Monday 27 February 2017 19:59:17 sunrise wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:46:16 -0600
>
> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
> >On 02/27/2017 09:44 AM, Joe wrote:
> >> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 08:53:30 -0600
> >>
> >> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
> >>> On 02/27/2017 07:43 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >>>> LibreOffice Base is, AFAIK *not* a relational database, but just
> >>>> a -possibly graphical- user interface to one. Relational databases,
> >>>> as I know them, have no "fonts", for example.
> >>>
> >>> I didn't claim it was ;/
> >>> I looked at it as it was install by default when I chose MATE as my
> >>> DE. The "font problem" was that I could not force its "help system"
> >>> to use a legible font size. Not being able to read its "help", I have
> >>> ABSOLUTELY NO idea of what capability it does/doesn't supply.
> >>
> >> It's sort of functionally nearly equivalent to MS Access on Windows 3
> >> i.e. 1992-ish.
> >
> >I had forgotten about MS Access, probably 'cause the less I think about
> >that employer the better. It was later than dBaseII but aimed pretty
> >much at the same market. Having used dBaseII was considered "qualifying
> >experience" for the job.
> >
> >> It's slow and as buggy as hell. It can't handle update
> >> queries. I think it still needs Java for reporting. Apart from that,
> >> it's about the quickest way to assemble an ad-hoc database
> >> application.
> >> Free, that is, there are probably better commercial products. I use it
> >> for this reason, but also that it is cross-platform, you can literally
> >> take a Base file from a Linux machine and run it on a Windows machine,
> >> and vice versa (for close-numbered versions of LO).
> >>
> >> But a lot depends on what you want to do. Only you know your actual
> >> database needs. LO Base can use an internal database file or pretty
> >> much any client-server database or other ODBC server. For making user
> >> applications, it's worth considering.
> >
> >Not if it throws barriers between me ant its documentation.
>
> In LibreOffice Help, try scrolling with the mouse wheel while holding
> 'Ctrl'; on my system the font size can be increased and decreased across a
> wide range.

The topics, but not the index.

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178233 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:46:16AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:

[...]

> A little research indicates that Tcl/Tk plays well with sqlite. A
> couple of years ago I started learning it for a now abandoned
> project. I'll follow up on that combo.

Funny that you mention that: Sqlite's main author, D. Richard Hipp
has been also involved in Tcl/Tk development and there are many cross-
ties between both projects (Sqlite's (excellent) test suite is written
in Tcl, Tcl's repository is Fossil, written by... D. Richard Hipp,
and so on). They make for a strong team.

Recommended reading:

  https://www.tcl.tk/community/tcl2004/Presentations/D.RichardHipp/slides/slides-all.html

TclTk is my favoured machinery when I want to crank out small GUIs.
Gets a bit to get the hang of it. Your mentioned wiki.tcl.tk (and the
Usenet (yes!) group comp.lang.tcl) are very good resources.

Regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAli0kBwACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaOcgCfdrP5pJ6brYuSKCHMzsVehpsc
umwAniE8Tc2durVNff95vmg7fhM3IKpe
=Vdnq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178245 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

On 02/27/2017 02:46 PM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:46:16AM -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> A little research indicates that Tcl/Tk plays well with sqlite. A
>> couple of years ago I started learning it for a now abandoned
>> project. I'll follow up on that combo.
>
> Funny that you mention that: Sqlite's main author, D. Richard Hipp
> has been also involved in Tcl/Tk development and there are many cross-
> ties between both projects (Sqlite's (excellent) test suite is written
> in Tcl, Tcl's repository is Fossil, written by... D. Richard Hipp,
> and so on). They make for a strong team.

<chuckle> What you quoted was my paraphrase of http://wiki.tcl.tk/2633 .
>
> Recommended reading:
>
>   https://www.tcl.tk/community/tcl2004/Presentations/D.RichardHipp/slides/slides-all.html

Only got a chance for a brief look. I like!

>
> TclTk is my favoured machinery when I want to crank out small GUIs.
> Gets a bit to get the hang of it. Your mentioned wiki.tcl.tk (and the
> Usenet (yes!) group comp.lang.tcl) are very good resources.
>
> Regards
> - -- tomás
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAli0kBwACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaOcgCfdrP5pJ6brYuSKCHMzsVehpsc
> umwAniE8Tc2durVNff95vmg7fhM3IKpe
> =Vdnq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178247 — Re: A cumulative reply [Re: A minimal relational database in Debian?]

Richard Owlett writes:
> >
> >> A little research indicates that Tcl/Tk plays well with sqlite. A
> >> couple of years ago I started learning it for a now abandoned
> >> project. I'll follow up on that combo.
> >
> > Funny that you mention that: Sqlite's main author, D. Richard Hipp
> > has been also involved in Tcl/Tk development and there are many cross-
> > ties between both projects (Sqlite's (excellent) test suite is written
> > in Tcl, Tcl's repository is Fossil, written by... D. Richard Hipp,
> > and so on). They make for a strong team.
>

Years ago, I used shsql-antagonize the Google for it-which is an SQL
database implemented with the Unix text utilities as a shell script;
DBs are tab delimited flat text files. Good for light database needs,
(joins are a little slow,) and still seems supported.

    John

-- 

John Conover, conover@rahul.net, http://www.johncon.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178223

That is an accessibility bug and ought to be reported as such and cargon 
copied to debian-accessibility.

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017, Richard Owlett wrote:

> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 08:17:56
> From: Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net>
> To: debian-user <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: A minimal relational database in Debian?
> Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 13:18:44 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> 
> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using dBaseII on 
> a MS-DOS machine.
> What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?
>
> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help" system 
> provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible size.
>
> https://packages.debian.org/stable/database/ was not useful as it doesn't 
> categorize the list.
>
> Suggestions?
> TIA
>
>

-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178229 — an answer plus minimal font size (was: A minimal relational database in Debian?

Richard Owlett wrote:

> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using 
> dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine.
> What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?

  no idea.  i've used about a dozen different ones over
the years and even written parts of one.

  my guess is that for a very simple DB a flat file or
group of files is decent enough and you can grep or
awk or even use things like join and sort on those

$ man join 
$ man sort
$ man awk
$ man bash

  those four things should actually give you most of
what you'd need beyond a basic editor.

  for more complex situations i'd really just go with
Maria DB  and call it good enough.  it works, it isn't
hard to set up and then you don't have to keep reinventing
the wheel.

$ apt-cache show maria* | grep ackage:


> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help" system 
> provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible size.

  i dunno, but i sure wish they'd honor the minimal font
size specified in the MATE setup.

  this is a consistent bitch of mine too.  i suppose it
would have helped had i filed an actual bug.  :)

  the alternative approach is to find the website on-line
and read the help via HTML browser which usually will 
honor a minimum font spec.


  songbird

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178240

On 28/02/17 02:17, Richard Owlett wrote:
> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using
> dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine.
> What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?
> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help" system
> provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible size.
> https://packages.debian.org/stable/database/ was not useful as it
> doesn't categorize the list.
> Suggestions?
> TIA

You can make minimal use of PostgreSQL. Easy to install and configure on 
Debian. Robust and runs well unattended. Thoroughly documented. Check 
out pgAdmin, which can administer and manage your database. It includes 
a table editor.

It sounds to me like you want a configurable CRUD front-end. Do you want 
a web interface?

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#178246

On 02/27/2017 06:06 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> On 28/02/17 02:17, Richard Owlett wrote:
>> The last time I needed a relational database my employer was using
>> dBaseII on a MS-DOS machine.
>> What is a functional equivalent in the Debian repository?
>> I looked at at LibreOffice Base. It was unusable as its "help" system
>> provided no intrinsic way to increase fonts to a legible size.
>> https://packages.debian.org/stable/database/ was not useful as it
>> doesn't categorize the list.
>> Suggestions?
>> TIA
>
> You can make minimal use of PostgreSQL. Easy to install and configure on
> Debian. Robust and runs well unattended. Thoroughly documented. Check
> out pgAdmin, which can administer and manage your database. It includes
> a table editor.
>
> It sounds to me like you want a configurable CRUD front-end. Do you
> want a web interface?

Hadn't run into that acronym before, had to look it up. But is what I 
want. Don't need a web interface. And to answer someone else, it will be 
strictly single user, everything resides on my laptop.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web