DBF Client/Server

rjpajaron · Post by **rjpajaron** » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:30 am

Just an input:

How about make this an open source project, same as X#?

If we charge for license fees, it will basically shut so many doors as PostgreSQL, MySQL, MariaDB to name a few are all free.

However, for a support, it will take X# model for support and update to subscribers.

Just a thought....

rjpajaron · Post by **rjpajaron** » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:34 am

FFF wrote:Wolfgang,
to add my .2 and reverse view:
I'd like a DBF replacement, which "looks" and behaves like a DBServer. If in the backend that is really a "dbf" is IMHO not really relevant.
So, one might consider building a DBServer-like Front which sits upon a Postgres backend.
Why? Because i presume this will be easier/cheaper/faster to implement, than re-invent a 100% reliable database-machine from scratch.
YMMV, of course...

Karl

This one get my attention: 100% because our cloud and mobile apps are on PostgreSQL but with Devart dotConnect for PostgreSQL.

But how about adding MySQL support also. Because Italians are mostly on that one too!

wriedmann · Post by **wriedmann** » Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:09 am

Hi Rene,

How about make this an open source project, same as X#?

in an ideal world, this would work. But I have my doubts that there are enough sponsors to keep the project free.

I'm willing to be one of the sponsors, but since my company is small (we are 4 people, 2 of them working with VO/X#) we cannot afford to large amounts.

But maybe, when the X# project is working, Robert will make his estimations, and then we will see if there is enough to start the project. It is a small market, and I see no big company sponsoring such a project like PostgreSQL or others (even MySQL is not more free, but part of Oracle and has lost much of its open source feeling).

Wolfgang

rjpajaron · Post by **rjpajaron** » Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:57 am

wriedmann wrote:Hi Rene,

How about make this an open source project, same as X#?
in an ideal world, this would work. But I have my doubts that there are enough sponsors to keep the project free.

I'm willing to be one of the sponsors, but since my company is small (we are 4 people, 2 of them working with VO/X#) we cannot afford to large amounts.

But maybe, when the X# project is working, Robert will make his estimations, and then we will see if there is enough to start the project. It is a small market, and I see no big company sponsoring such a project like PostgreSQL or others (even MySQL is not more free, but part of Oracle and has lost much of its open source feeling).

Wolfgang

Hi Wolfgang,

My opinion:

Know the demand. Yes, there is. Me included.

Best guess estimates that are willing to support it. Most of all, I already cemented my path towards to PostgreSQL and I will not stop a dime; however, I can afford to have 2 runtimes: ADS/XBase and PostgreSQL. Two for different market. Right now I have the two in perfect synergy.

So, it is best part of FOX program. With standard or free edition available to 3 to 5 users, unlimited to those who subscribe to it. I would like to see this as something I can pass on to my client but it must be affordable (a relative term).

Next is: is there an existing codebase to start this on? Will start from zero with X# as the primary dev language?

Volunteers?

We have long way to get to realization, but I will supporter on this development if ever this one come to fruition, ADS users must be its primary target market. Hence, ADS functionality must be the benchmark at Version 1.0

My .02 cents.

Regards,

Rene

wriedmann · Post by **wriedmann** » Wed Jul 18, 2018 6:10 am

Hi Rene,

the codebase of course will be there: the X# RDD (when it is finished).

Practically the RDD code has to be separated in two parts: the server part with the physical access to the files, indexing, filtering, and the client part to link to the application. In the middle there should be some TCP-IP communication.

I have not the time and not the knowledge to work on such a project, therefore it should be made by people that have both - and people that therefore gets money for this.

Having a SQL interface for sure is a heavy job and cannot be part of the first versions, and therefore it cannot replace ADS.
Personally I don't see such a project as competitor to ADS - ADS has a very long story, and a large functionality, and IMHO it has no sense to build things like the DataDictionary or ADS/ADT support into a X# DBF server.

I see such a product as a replacement for plain DBFCDX, maybe with some enhancements like Unicode support, special blob files or other functionality we need.
And what IMHO is absolut critical: it must be maintenance free.

Wolfgang

rjpajaron · Post by **rjpajaron** » Wed Jul 18, 2018 6:19 am

Hi Wolfgang,

On ADS replacement, I am based it on my use case scenario.

My apps will continue to work even without ADS, except the hidden and secured access where the exact location of dbf files are completely hidden and unshared to users. Only ADS see it. This is the only thing DBFCDX cannot do, of course, ADS added more such client/server and other stuff that are obviously should be there in day one.

I am not using ADS with SQL syntax, except when using Data Architect.

I have read a lot that people are doing some stuff client/server stuff with DBF. Maybe, this is the start where people start pooling talents and me will just contribute funds same way we did with Fox program.

To make it future proof, it must work in some ways in mobile platform. I see some need for that too.

--

Rene

rjpajaron · Post by **rjpajaron** » Wed Jul 18, 2018 6:30 am

One more thing.

Good thing about this type of project development is that no one is waiting. It means, developer can focus on making sure product works as planned on day one at version 1.0.

All are already happy with ADS and other free/paid rdbms with years of proven use.
But some, including myself, still believes that there is a need for dbf simplicity, same way that we SQLite in our mobile apps because PostgreSQL is not possible to be hosted on a mobile platform.

wriedmann · Post by **wriedmann** » Sun Jul 22, 2018 3:59 pm

Hello,

I have now analyzed my own DBF applications if they could be moved to an SQL database using an adapted dataserver, but most of them would not.
There are only small issues with standard browser and edit windows - these can be fixed with not too much effort.
The biggest problem are reports and elaborations that rely on sequential data access and that would need a complete rewrite.

This makes a DBF Server for me a very important tool, and I can understand a friend that wrote: "for me a DBF server has a similar importance than the migration to X#. If DBF becomes unusable some day, the X# migration is useless for me".

Wolfgang

FFF · Post by **FFF** » Sun Jul 22, 2018 4:27 pm

wriedmann wrote:The biggest problem are reports and elaborations that rely on sequential data access and that would need a complete rewrite.

Wolfgang,
I suppose, "sequential" means not "raw order", but you'll certainly have a index-based access you skip through until your index-expression evaluates to false? This should IMHO be solvable from a sql-viewpoint.
But probably i have no clue, as usual

Have a nice sunday evening!

Karl

wriedmann · Post by **wriedmann** » Sun Jul 22, 2018 4:31 pm

Hi Karl,

I suppose, "sequential" means not "raw order", but you'll certainly have a index-based access you skip through until your index-expression evaluates to false?

yes, I'm using the orders.

And of course this is solvable, but not without rewriting the code.

Wolfgang

Main menu