![]() | ![]() Products ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Home » Technical Support » DBISAM Technical Support » Support Forums » DBISAM General » View Thread |
Messages 1 to 8 of 8 total |
![]() |
Mon, Oct 9 2006 12:37 PM | Permanent Link |
"Jose Eduardo Helminsky" | Tim
Is there any ETA for DBISAM 4.25 or DBISAM 4.24 build 2 ? I am asking this to schedule my visits to update servers, because some servers I can´t update remotelly. Eduardo |
Mon, Oct 9 2006 2:11 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Eduardo,
<< Is there any ETA for DBISAM 4.25 or DBISAM 4.24 build 2 ? I am asking this to schedule my visits to update servers, because some servers I can´t update remotelly. >> Provided that the EDB beta is out this week, which things look good right now, I should be able to do the next 4.x build by next Monday. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, Oct 9 2006 3:55 PM | Permanent Link |
"Jose Eduardo Helminsky" | Thanks
Eduardo |
Sun, Nov 12 2006 11:37 AM | Permanent Link |
"Frans van Daalen" | "Tim Young [Elevate Software]" <timyoung@elevatesoft.com> wrote in message news:2CEA5133-32D0-4633-AF11-DC623F5C1037@news.elevatesoft.com... > Eduardo, > > << Is there any ETA for DBISAM 4.25 or DBISAM 4.24 build 2 ? I am asking > this to schedule my visits to update servers, because some servers I can´t > update remotelly. >> > > Provided that the EDB beta is out this week, which things look good right > now, I should be able to do the next 4.x build by next Monday. > > -- > Tim Young > Elevate Software > www.elevatesoft.com Just making sure this thread, or beter Tim's answer, is not lost in digi-space <grin> |
Mon, Nov 13 2006 5:10 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Frans,
<< Just making sure this thread, or beter Tim's answer, is not lost in digi-space <grin> >> The delay is EDB - we ran into a binding issue during the testing of the stored procedures and I've been working on correcting it. On a related note, we've had to punt on a few ANSI SQL/PSM items due to: 1) They're the worst sort of language constructs ever devised by man, such as is the case with the way exception handling and diagnostics is done. SQL Server 2005 has it right with structured exception handling in blocks like Delphi and every other modern language. And anyone that sets up a system where an attempt to navigate a cursor past the EOF raises an exception should be shot. Can you imagine such a construct in Delphi's TDataSet component ? 2) The binding issues involved with mixing DDL and DML are a mess, which is is why Interbase simply doesn't allow DDL inside of stored procedures. I took a different tack and have basically set it up so all DDL and DML (non-cursor operations and procedure/function calls) are dynamic like they are now with DBISAM. This will also allow for a smooth transition to other non-SQL languages that don't have built-in SQL bindings. I'm glad to say that the above is resolved, and I've simply got some finishing touches to put on some of the above and it will be ready for beta. BTW, the above is more for everyone's consumption, so I apologize for the lengthy, and somewhat off-topic, response. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Tue, Nov 14 2006 3:40 AM | Permanent Link |
Roy Lambert NLH Associates ![]() | Tim
There are days I really wish I knew what you were talking about. Then I sit and reflect and realise I don't really care ![]() Roy Lambert |
Tue, Nov 14 2006 3:59 AM | Permanent Link |
"Frans van Daalen" | "Tim Young [Elevate Software]" <timyoung@elevatesoft.com> wrote in message
news:D2920687-241A-4CFC-BDB2-D8A239C5FEE9@news.elevatesoft.com... > > BTW, the above is more for everyone's consumption, so I apologize for the > lengthy, and somewhat off-topic, response. > > I find nothing off-topic in that answer, the answer is much apriciated. So the light in the tunnel was a train ? ![]() |
Tue, Nov 14 2006 8:59 AM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Roy,
<< There are days I really wish I knew what you were talking about. >> Actually, that was basically my point. ![]() design in SQL/PSM is obtuse, confusing, and archaic. I mean, the whole point of having interpreted stored procedures in EDB vs. compiled stored procedures in DBISAM is to make them more accessible without requiring the recompile. The SQL/PSM standard does not accomplish that with respect to exception and cursor handling. We want customers to easily understand and adopt the stored procedures as an easy way of centralizing complex database access that previously had to be done entirely in the client application. This is especially true with EDB having more and more various front-ends, such as ODBC, ADO.NET, and VCL. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
This web page was last updated on Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 07:31 PM | Privacy Policy![]() © 2024 Elevate Software, Inc. All Rights Reserved Questions or comments ? ![]() |