userWINO@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Myron Wintonyk) (02/28/91)
Our department, without consulting me, decided to produce a database using clipper on a PC system using Novell Netware. The reporting facilities are bad ... real bad. They were intending to use a package called Relational Report Writer to produce reports. Unfortunately, it can open a maximum 10 files/databases at one time. For the reports that they require. This is not sufficient. As a result, I am left with a dilemma. Should I try to develop this system further, and if so, how should I produce reports. I have only a basic knowledge of Clipper and dBase, and have no idea how to produce useful reports. Or, should I start over again on a mainframe system? My main concerns are : Sorting in a non-indexed order, Queries, and Scopes (only use a certain subset of the data). So, my question is : Does anyone out there know an easy way to develop reports. Hopefully a product that non-computer people can use (mostly secretaries). If you have any ideas on how to proceed, please send me a message Myron Wintonyk, Faculty of Medicine University of Alberta USERWINO@MTS.UCS.UALBERTA.CA
agonzale@nmsu.edu (Agustin Gonzalez-Tuchmann) (03/01/91)
In article <RN.170@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA> userWINO@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Myron Wintonyk) writes:
Our department, without consulting me, decided to produce
a database using clipper on a PC system using Novell Netware.
The reporting facilities are bad ... real bad.
They were intending to use a package called Relational Report
Writer to produce reports. Unfortunately, it can open a maximum
10 files/databases at one time. For the reports that they require.
This is not sufficient.
With DOS 3.3 and higher you can open as many files as you like,
the only restriction being available memory.
Myron Wintonyk,
Faculty of Medicine
University of Alberta
USERWINO@MTS.UCS.UALBERTA.CA
--
--------------------------------- * -----------------------------------
Agustin Gonzalez-Tuchmann dbase-l list owner.
New Mexico State University Office: SH-165
Computer Science Department Phone: (505) 646-6243
Las Cruces, N.M. 88003-0001 e-mail: agonzale@nmsu.edujgb@prism.gatech.EDU (James G. Baker) (03/01/91)
In article <RN.170@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA> userWINO@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Myron Wintonyk) writes: >Our department, without consulting me, decided to produce >a database using clipper on a PC system using Novell Netware. >The reporting facilities are bad ... real bad. > >They were intending to use a package called Relational Report >Writer to produce reports. Unfortunately, it can open a maximum >10 files/databases at one time. For the reports that they require. >This is not sufficient. I would hope this a CONFIG.SYS issue, but ten Ten open database files is really a lot. Perhaps the files are not structured in the right way. (Relations, keys, etc). Clipper is a 100% programming environment. It has really broken away from the dBase3 screen-formats and reports which I always thought were extremely limited; but I am a programmer at heart. (I've been using it since Autumn '86.) I have heard good things about R&R but there is always a trade-off between flexibility and ease-of-use. (Unix and C are good examples of this :-) Being a programmer, I have made all of my reports "from scratch" - I want to be in control. If your reports are too free form - and the database doesn't change often - you could export it to other packages like Q&A that offer more English-like/SQL-ish reports. Being a programming language, there are lots of libraries out there for Clipper (some PD, all unbelievably cheap, less that $200), that can do a lot. (Networking, Reports, Queries, etc). Look in "Databased Advisor" for examples as well as software places like "Programmer's Workshop". But, if you want to avoid code-writing at all costs, Clipper really isn't the right thing versus the {Mac-like, GUI, etc} query packages. >As a result, I am left with a dilemma. Should I try to develop >this system further, and if so, how should I produce reports. I >have only a basic knowledge of Clipper and dBase, and have no >idea how to produce useful reports. Or, should I start over again >on a mainframe system? There is more out there for Clipper and PCs than any mainframe. A 486 will give a Vaxen a run for its money and the users love the PC interfaces that should be easy to make up. >My main concerns are : Sorting in a non-indexed order, >Queries, and Scopes (only use a certain subset of the data). Again, there is practically *nothing* Clipper can not do. But it is a programming language that with v5.0 is moderately close to C in power and flexibility. Good luck... -- BAKER,JAMES G - Undergraduate Lab Instructor, School of Electrical Engineering ____ _ _ Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 | | _ |_) uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!jgb (_|. |_). |_). Internet: jgb@prism.gatech.edu
tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan) (03/01/91)
In article <RN.170@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA> userWINO@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Myron Wintonyk) writes: >Our department, without consulting me, decided to produce >a database using clipper on a PC system using Novell Netware. > >The reporting facilities are bad ... real bad. > >They were intending to use a package called Relational Report >Writer to produce reports. Unfortunately, it can open a maximum >10 files/databases at one time. For the reports that they require. >This is not sufficient. > >As a result, I am left with a dilemma. Should I try to develop >this system further, and if so, how should I produce reports. I >have only a basic knowledge of Clipper and dBase, and have no >idea how to produce useful reports. Or, should I start over again >on a mainframe system? > >My main concerns are : Sorting in a non-indexed order, >Queries, and Scopes (only use a certain subset of the data). > >So, my question is : Does anyone out there know an easy way >to develop reports. Hopefully a product that non-computer >people can use (mostly secretaries). > >If you have any ideas on how to proceed, please send me a message > >Myron Wintonyk, >Faculty of Medicine >University of Alberta Myron... Just a quick note re: keeping things in perspective. I think Clipper's reporting capability is just fine, there is (as you note) no significant report writer included but there isn't one with C or Pascal either. Personally I program all my reports but many people use R & R and they seem happy with it. I guess my point is that I'm doubtful that your desire for secretaries to write reports will ever be met. If you have more files than R & R can handle gut instinct tells me that a secretary isn't likely to understand the relationships. They aren't going to be doing SQL queries or RPG stuff on mainframes either. I might suggest that you contact Concentric just to see if they have a solution to the file limitation or get somebody to program a QBE sort of report system for you using Clipper. tom leylan tleylan@pegasus.com (formerly with Nantucket Corp.)
Rick_Percival@kcbbs.gen.nz (Rick Percival) (03/03/91)
>So, my question is : Does anyone out there know an easy way >to develop reports. Hopefully a product that non-computer >people can use (mostly secretaries). > >If you have any ideas on how to proceed, please send me a message > You might want to have a look at Clarion Professional Developer. It comes with an equivalent of R&R called report Writer. It can use dbase files so that shouldn't be a problem and you will find that the development language is a REAL pleasure to use.
aprzygie@iiic.ethz.ch (Antoni Bronislaw Przygienda) (03/06/91)
In article <23102@hydra.gatech.EDU> jgb@prism.gatech.EDU (James G. Baker) writes: > >Clipper is a 100% programming environment. It has really broken away >from the dBase3 screen-formats and reports which I always thought were >extremely limited; but I am a programmer at heart. (I've been using it >since Autumn '86.) > I devellop professional software with Clipper since 1986 too & my opinions are quite different: 1) clipper is limited too !!!! Don't forget: it is NOT a database server, it has more of a FILE SYSTEM in it. If you don't believe it, just try to open some databases with a lot of indices & some relation to (which you can only do for FIELDS with the same names, joky, isn't it, I never heard the relational model forbids two foreign keys of the same relation in relation!) & put a couple of hundreds (not even thousands) of records into it !! The performance is gone! My experience is: You have to be really tricky to have a fast application & the performance almost always goes down, when you do some changes to it!! 2) The memory of this beast is a really nasty problem ! Why ? YOu never have any !! Perhaps the Clipper 5.0 is better, but I tried it once & found some teriffying bugs from start on !! Ever tried to compile applications with macros in strings ?? The Summer Clipper knows how to do it, the new one forgot this stuff !! That's why I'm still on the older one. 3) Ever tried to power the beast down when it works on his databases. The next time you start your application it will break down with a kind of 'index file corrupted ??!' execuse & you have no way to find it out before !! > >Being a programming language, there are lots of libraries out there for >Clipper (some PD, all unbelievably cheap, less that $200), that can do >a lot. (Networking, Reports, Queries, etc). Look in "Databased Advisor" >for examples as well as software places like "Programmer's Workshop". > Agree, but the quality is not very good in the most cases & it is a cheap tool of course !! >There is more out there for Clipper and PCs than any mainframe. A 486 >will give a Vaxen a run for its money and the users love the PC interfaces >that should be easy to make up. > >>My main concerns are : Sorting in a non-indexed order, >>Queries, and Scopes (only use a certain subset of the data). > >Again, there is practically *nothing* Clipper can not do. But it is a >programming language that with v5.0 is moderately close to C in power >and flexibility. > Yes, but not with a REAL amout of data, or ever tried to do a SET FILTER on a database with 3'000 records in it (I mean, it is not a lot, don't forget!!) & the damned thing doesn't give you a real abstraction of a database (standard case: a report searching something with a index, nice !! When the user comes to you & says: OK, let's me do it with another attribute of the relation you say: Ehmm, ok, I have to do little bit programming & it will cost you a little bit of money & it will be probably running again ! In SQL you simply have to add another index to your relation !) The most important thing for me: The damned thing is not portable !!! All my customers see the nice, cheap Unix Workstations with a lot of power & an REAL file system (not the FAT, greasy DOS thing) & asks me: When can I have my application there ?? My answer is: Never, unless you pay a lot of money, so we can throw your Clipper-Stuff away & do it with Informix!! Don't forget: The PC is not a solution, it's more of an weekend-hack being very sucessful & the real systems are yet to come !! So go over these things again to find your decission or do it my way: I'm just implementing the Clipper Stuff under UNIX since a couple of months (it' not easy, the macro stuff doesn't even really match a YACC specification [I mean, Clipper's not a language anyway, it's more a dialect]) !!! ;-) Tony
tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan) (03/06/91)
In article <26689@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> aprzygie@iiic.ethz.ch (Antoni Bronislaw Przygienda) writes: >In article <23102@hydra.gatech.EDU> jgb@prism.gatech.EDU (James G. Baker) writes: > 1) clipper is limited too !!!! Don't forget: it is NOT a database > server, it has more of a FILE SYSTEM in it. If you don't believe > it, just try to open some databases with a lot of indices & > some relation to (which you can only do for FIELDS with the same > 2) The memory of this beast is a really nasty problem ! Why ? YOu > 3) Ever tried to power the beast down when it works on his databases. > Yes, but not with a REAL amout of data, or ever tried to do a > SET FILTER on a database with 3'000 records in it (I mean, it is not > Tony... no big deal but I think you're missing the power of Clipper. Many people agree with you on the limitations of the .DBF data format and so use Clipper quite successfully with SQL, Btrieve and the Emerald Bay Engine. These things will be even easier with 5.0 as Nantucket has separated the database component from the language component. Among the database drivers that Nantucket will produce is one for Paradox, SQL Server, SQLbase and (I forget the other one). There are bugs in the first release of Clipper 5.0 but the fix disk is in beta test at the moment. Among the incredible things one can do with 5.0 today is allocate a 10 MB "ragged" array (an element of an array can be another array) on a machine with 1 MB of memory. The Virtual Memory Manager takes care of everything. In any case, the memory usage is the lowest of any "dBase" style language if you consider that dBASE and FoxPro have to load an interpreter. As for corruption of indexes when the system powers down you ought to see what happens when you do it in the middle of a hard disk format (you aren't suggesting Clipper ought to intercept somebody flipping the power switch and demanding that DOS flush it's buffers are you) ? BTW, I don't think anybody uses SET FILTER, it isn't intended to speed up searches, records are masked out but there is no way that the system can determine whether a record 3000 records away is going to match until it gets there., the file isn't physically smaller. In any case, you don't have to like Clipper, many of us do... tom leylan (former senior systems analyst - Nantucket Corporation)
aprzygie@iiic.ethz.ch (Antoni Bronislaw Przygienda) (03/08/91)
In article <1991Mar6.094706.17470@pegasus.com> tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan) writes: >> 1) clipper is limited too !!!! Don't forget: it is NOT a database >> server, it has more of a FILE SYSTEM in it. If you don't believe >> it, just try to open some databases with a lot of indices & >> some relation to (which you can only do for FIELDS with the same > >> 2) The memory of this beast is a really nasty problem ! Why ? YOu > >> 3) Ever tried to power the beast down when it works on his databases. > >> Yes, but not with a REAL amout of data, or ever tried to do a >> SET FILTER on a database with 3'000 records in it (I mean, it is not >> >Tony... no big deal but I think you're missing the power of Clipper. Many >people agree with you on the limitations of the .DBF data format and so use >Clipper quite successfully with SQL, Btrieve and the Emerald Bay Engine. > OK, it's true !! I was in a quite 'flammy' mode the evening I wrote this !! I agree with you: on this limitated, toy-like DOS-tins Clipper is probably the best Database (EVEN 4GL TOOL) you can get, which doesn't use 16MB of memory & a 586 40Mhz powered 50'000$ super-DOS machine !! I have made my money for 2 years now with Clipper & wrote several application I think even you guys at Nantucket would shake you heads seeing that !! But you know, I work a lot with Unix/VM/VMS stuff & the things are nicer than Clipper is ! So I try to warn some people with perhaps the need for a really big machine with a really powerful DATABASE having recommended clipper by a couple of hackers having no idea about database stuff ! >These things will be even easier with 5.0 as Nantucket has separated the >database component from the language component. Among the database drivers >that Nantucket will produce is one for Paradox, SQL Server, SQLbase and >(I forget the other one). OK, I studied the whole documentation that came with Clipper 5.0 to my company & found nothing, really nothing, not a single word of description of this feature I was really greedy to get my little fingers on (OCELOT & a couple of other things are waiting !!!). Give me the hint where I can find the stuff or otherwise don't make me greedier !! > >There are bugs in the first release of Clipper 5.0 but the fix disk is in >beta test at the moment. Among the incredible things one can do with 5.0 >today is allocate a 10 MB "ragged" array (an element of an array can be >another array) on a machine with 1 MB of memory. The Virtual Memory Manager >takes care of everything. OK, just look at Unix with paging & swapping. I think, Nantucket will need a couple of years to do something similar. About fixes: Why not do it the first time right ? We all saw the same story with the Summer release of clipper. The fixes came also a couple of months later, but till then my hair got a little bit more gray. > >In any case, the memory usage is the lowest of any "dBase" style language >if you consider that dBASE and FoxPro have to load an interpreter. As for >corruption of indexes when the system powers down you ought to see what >happens when you do it in the middle of a hard disk format (you aren't >suggesting Clipper ought to intercept somebody flipping the power switch >and demanding that DOS flush it's buffers are you) ? > I never tried to compare Clipper to DBASE. DBASE is a HEAP OF JUNK & I used it exactly once & never again! I know, it's a joke, DOS allows everyone to format the harddisk, it's not a operating system, it's a floppy utility (named quite right DOS !!) >BTW, I don't think anybody uses SET FILTER, it isn't intended to speed up >searches, records are masked out but there is no way that the system can >determine whether a record 3000 records away is going to match until it >gets there., the file isn't physically smaller. Yes, I agree, but I suppose you read some theory about database design too & know there are better ways to implement such features !! > >In any case, you don't have to like Clipper, many of us do... > >tom leylan >(former senior systems analyst - Nantucket Corporation) > OK, I'm sorry, don't take it personally !! I like this beast, too !! It's small, fast !!, saves you a lot of time & doesn't take to much power away !! And of course, it's rather cheap compared to all this Informix & Oracle guys boasting about their 'heterogenous-net-database-servers' & demanding $1000 runtime fee for every installation with the smallest version !! Guys, I think, clipper won't be the best database known in history, but it was quite useful for a couple of years on this damned DOS machines & brought you a lot of money, for sure !! Last question: Why don't you take this stuff to Unix ??! It's not that difficult. Or otherwise we can talk about the version I'm writing now !! Tony
jgb@prism.gatech.EDU (James G. Baker) (03/08/91)
In article <26870@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> aprzygie@iiic.ethz.ch (Antoni Bronislaw Przygienda) writes: >OK, it's true !! I was in a quite 'flammy' mode the evening I wrote this !! >I agree with you: on this limitated, toy-like DOS-tins Clipper is probably >the best Database... >I try to warn some people with perhaps the need for a really big machine with >a really powerful DATABASE having recommended clipper by a couple of hackers >having no idea about database stuff ! Settle down. No one was offending Unix. But Clipper and DOS are making the "big guys" think about what kind of performance/price that users want. *No* one can say that the PC and DOS were *not* the building blocks for the microcomputer revolution of the past 10 years. I tire of people who stop *listening* when DOS is mentioned. Its a matter of the right tool for the right job. If: the interface is important database files < 10 MB ish time to get system *working* is ASAP users < 50 ish then Clipper/Novell could be the right tool. How many real estate offices want some raised-floor put in for the VAX machine room? BTW, the hacker comment won't affect my current MS in Computer Science program. >About fixes: Why not do it the first time right ? We all saw the same story > with the Summer release of clipper. The fixes came also a couple of months > later, but till then my hair got a little bit more gray. Your Unix OS / applications never needed any bug fixes? Impressive. >I never tried to compare Clipper to DBASE. DBASE is a HEAP OF JUNK & I used >it exactly once & never again! I know, it's a joke, DOS allows everyone to >format the harddisk, it's not a operating system, it's a floppy utility >(named quite right DOS !!) You may not like it, but dBase *set the standard* for PC databases many moons ago. Its not used as much at run-time but every Clipper programmer has it to bring things up *fast*. (Like the B-52 was used instead of the B-1b: its been around and its capabilities/problems are known exactly.) Agreed. DOS does ask "Are you sure?" Does "rm -r /*.*"? I think it is also quite something when NORTON UTILITIES are ported to SysV! Every CS undergrad boasts that Unix is the only real OS. They get offended by DOS. (It was undoubtedly a DOS machine that got their interest in the first place.) Maybe its my Engineering background, but people *out there* want to it work too -and soon. They could care less that its beautiful and lovely and all that because they've heard it before and know to duck for cover. -- BAKER,JAMES G - Undergraduate Lab Instructor, School of Electrical Engineering ____ _ _ Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 | | _ |_) uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!jgb (_|. |_). |_). Internet: jgb@prism.gatech.edu
tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan) (03/08/91)
>you a lot of money, for sure !! Last question: Why don't you take this stuff >to Unix ??! It's not that difficult. Or otherwise we can talk about the >version I'm writing now !! > > Tony, Most people don't know about it but there was a version of Clipper running under UNIX about 4 years ago. It was announced and demonstrated at Comdex, Fall (in Las Vegas). It was never released however. Many people ask about a Unix version but it takes more than a port of the code to make money. Support becomes a big issue. They way I explain it is that it doesn't do anyone any good to be known as the "worst" DBMS running under Unix. So if one can't be near the top, the money is better invested on a platform one understands. I can't speak for Nantucket but I imagine ROI (return on investment) is one of the guiding reasons to not jump on Unix at this point. There is a limited amount of resources and one looks for the place where the most money is to be made given one's expertise. You're in Zurich right ? There is at least one hotel in Zurich running their entire operation on a Clipper app. A company in Munich wrote it (I worked there for a while). It monitors the phone system and logs calls, basically everything from check in to check out. Clipper is by no means perfect but the Extend System (permitting the relatively seamless integration of C and assembler) makes it pretty handy. As for information on the RDD (replaceable database drivers) you should contact Nantucket directly. You have a choice of their office in Cologne Germany or in London, England. later... tom
tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan) (03/09/91)
In article <23838@hydra.gatech.EDU> jgb@prism.gatech.EDU (James G. Baker) writes: > >You may not like it, but dBase *set the standard* for PC databases many >moons ago. Its not used as much at run-time but every Clipper programmer >has it to bring things up *fast*. Oh James... just had to set this one straight. Most Clipper programmers won't let dBASE on their computers. Seriously nothing I write could run in dBASE any longer, don't even have it on my machine for interactive querying of .DBF files. A shareware product called Pocket Dot is a very good alternative which can recognize the .NTX format as well as all the Clipper functions. The coolest thing I've seen lately is dClip by Roger Donnay which permits interactive use of just about anything you can throw at it including functions from all the third-party libraries. I just got back from the Australian Clipper DevCon and Roger was there interactively running code blocks and all sorts of stuff. tom