Prev: Would this be possible with bBrowser
Next: Assigning Cancel inside an ActiveX event
From: Barbara on 11 Jun 2008 05:57
So the time has come for my client to run the VO 2.8 and Clipper 5.2
versions. Both are using dbfcdx. Preliminary tests did confirm that this
would work. Unfortunately it was not tested under load conditions. It
appears that they are experiencing corrupted index files.

Both applications have the capabilities of reindexing and some users are
do a reindex from Windows and others from Dos.

My question for anyone that has been through this before, is which
application should be responsible for the reindexing. Or should it
technically not matter?

Barbara
From: Geoff Schaller on 11 Jun 2008 18:11
Barbara.

As long as the drivers are the same, technically it won't matter. The
reason you may get index corruptions is because Clipper and VO handle
buffering quite differently and so may build their indexes on slightly
different data. The other problem is memo related.

Why not just bring the clipper app into VO?

Geoff


"Barbara" <barbara*DeleteThis*@easytrip.net> wrote in message
news:48500419$0$17156$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net:

> So the time has come for my client to run the VO 2.8 and Clipper 5.2
> versions. Both are using dbfcdx. Preliminary tests did confirm that this
> would work. Unfortunately it was not tested under load conditions. It
> appears that they are experiencing corrupted index files.
>
> Both applications have the capabilities of reindexing and some users are
> do a reindex from Windows and others from Dos.
>
> My question for anyone that has been through this before, is which
> application should be responsible for the reindexing. Or should it
> technically not matter?
>
> Barbara

From: Barbara on 11 Jun 2008 12:57
Geoff

I did consider the memo issue and the only files with an FPT are used in
the VO version and not accessed in the dos version.

I am guessing the buffering is not something I can control? Just trying
to figure out how to minimize issues. I would like to know more about
this part if possible.

I would love to run just the VO app however the client would prefer to
do this a module at a time. I do understand their desire to have some of
the project in Windows rather than wait until everything is ready.

As a piece is moved to the VO version is it turned off in the Dos
version. However this is not the whole picture. A section like
maintaining Customers has been moved to the VO version, but several of
the dos sections still use Customers and might need to update some fields.


Barbara




> Barbara.
>
> As long as the drivers are the same, technically it won't matter. The
> reason you may get index corruptions is because Clipper and VO handle
> buffering quite differently and so may build their indexes on slightly
> different data. The other problem is memo related.
>
> Why not just bring the clipper app into VO?
>
> Geoff
>
>
> "Barbara" <barbara*DeleteThis*@easytrip.net> wrote in message
> news:48500419$0$17156$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net:
>
>> So the time has come for my client to run the VO 2.8 and Clipper 5.2
>> versions. Both are using dbfcdx. Preliminary tests did confirm that this
>> would work. Unfortunately it was not tested under load conditions. It
>> appears that they are experiencing corrupted index files.
>>
>> Both applications have the capabilities of reindexing and some users are
>> do a reindex from Windows and others from Dos.
>>
>> My question for anyone that has been through this before, is which
>> application should be responsible for the reindexing. Or should it
>> technically not matter?
>>
>> Barbara
>
From: Amilcar A. Camargo on 11 Jun 2008 21:05
Hi Barbara,

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:57:16 +0000, Barbara <barbara*DeleteThis*@easytrip.net>
wrote:

>So the time has come for my client to run the VO 2.8 and Clipper 5.2
>versions. Both are using dbfcdx. Preliminary tests did confirm that this
>would work. Unfortunately it was not tested under load conditions. It
>appears that they are experiencing corrupted index files.
>
>Both applications have the capabilities of reindexing and some users are
> do a reindex from Windows and others from Dos.
>
>My question for anyone that has been through this before, is which
>application should be responsible for the reindexing. Or should it
>technically not matter?

You have several settings that allow VO to better emulate Xbase behaviour. Some
time ago i made an app that worked concurrently with a DOS one. From time o
time some errors appeared but they seemed related to network issues. Both
programs ended their useful life before this last can be settled down.

The following settngs have a strong impact in this case:

SetAnsi(): should be FALSE in VO
SetInternational(): should be set to #Clipper so index are built the same as
Clipper

RddInfo( _SET_HPLOCKING, FALSE )
RddInfo( _SET_NEWINDEXLOCK, FALSE )

These last settings affect the way index files are created or locked during
skip and the like. Check the help file for more info.

HTH,
Amilcar A. Camargo F.
Guatemala, C. A.
From: Barbara on 27 Jun 2008 14:15
I have added your settings to the windows version and the client is
still saying they are having index issues. The VO program can only index
one set of the dbf files. The Clipper version can (unfortunately)
reindex everything.

They are not sure how the index files are getting damaged. As expected
things work fine on my test machines. She did say someone's computer
locked up and the user did not pay attention and reindex. It took a bit
of time before they got around to a reindex, mostly after data was
looking even worse. Once they did reindex everything was good again.

I have tried to explain that teaching users when they have to reindex
CDX files is what needs to happen. Sadly, she said that this is not
going to happen. Moving to SQL right now is not an option. And they want
to run the dos and windows versions simultaneously.

The dos program is rather large and I a bit of a memory hog. The windows
program is not that large right now. I do know that I asked for advice
awhile back regarding this issue and pretty much everyone said this
should work but might not.

Any thoughts? Something I missed? I am ok with finding out I over looked
something. Things are getting a bit heated and I really want to avoid
telling them I told you so.

Barbara



> Hi Barbara,
>
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:57:16 +0000, Barbara <barbara*DeleteThis*@easytrip.net>
> wrote:
>
>> So the time has come for my client to run the VO 2.8 and Clipper 5.2
>> versions. Both are using dbfcdx. Preliminary tests did confirm that this
>> would work. Unfortunately it was not tested under load conditions. It
>> appears that they are experiencing corrupted index files.
>>
>> Both applications have the capabilities of reindexing and some users are
>> do a reindex from Windows and others from Dos.
>>
>> My question for anyone that has been through this before, is which
>> application should be responsible for the reindexing. Or should it
>> technically not matter?
>
> You have several settings that allow VO to better emulate Xbase behaviour. Some
> time ago i made an app that worked concurrently with a DOS one. From time o
> time some errors appeared but they seemed related to network issues. Both
> programs ended their useful life before this last can be settled down.
>
> The following settngs have a strong impact in this case:
>
> SetAnsi(): should be FALSE in VO
> SetInternational(): should be set to #Clipper so index are built the same as
> Clipper
>
> RddInfo( _SET_HPLOCKING, FALSE )
> RddInfo( _SET_NEWINDEXLOCK, FALSE )
>
> These last settings affect the way index files are created or locked during
> skip and the like. Check the help file for more info.
>
> HTH,
> Amilcar A. Camargo F.
> Guatemala, C. A.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Would this be possible with bBrowser
Next: Assigning Cancel inside an ActiveX event