Don,So, for 6 months, OO (I presume) and now LO (is it that old?) have been promoting a db which doesn't work. I have over 10 full time days invested in this, and I'm watching it fall apart in front of me, apparently irretrievably. I understand LO has NO programmer working on BASE, and with the lack of protest see on the list no one's using it anyway.
I'm baffled by all this. This thing is actually far more stable and reliable than I ever experienced Access to be when I used it daily for about 5 years. The interface designer works well. There's just not much to be distressed by and a lot to like, but...it looks like a dead dog. This is sad, and perplexing, and ultimately irrational.
For me personally, it's also desperate - or rather *I* am. I'm doing this thing to support my work with a non-profit educational group associated with the Wikimedia Foundation (the folks who manage Wikipedia). I only have so much time, and I've invested a lot in this project. Now I essentially have little or nothing to show for it, right when we're working hard against an utterly inflexible deadline.
I see no reason to hope for a fix with Base, and when my record count doubles again, later this week, it'll take almost 5 minutes to locate a record that's at the other end of the db, I need an alternative.
Does anyone have any suggestions? More specifically,1. Are there any alternative graphic interface tools that even approximate Base's functionality (other than Access)? The last time I looked - a number of weeks ago, I didn't come up with any equivalents.
2. How feasible is it simply to use SQL? I never done this, so I have no idea.
Since I'm reasonable comfortable with Ruby, I'm trying to think of a way to port this thing to a db engine that has a ruby driver (which HYPERSQL doesn't - tells us something, doesn't it?), and do it all from a command line. Painful thought, but better than grinding to a complete halt.
I'm eager to read people's thoughts on all this. And thanks, Alex and Don, for your response. Tom On 07/27/2011 06:34 AM, Don Myers wrote:
I've used base ever since it was first offered. About 6 months ago a Java update (I'm running Ubuntu 11.04) slowed it down to a pathetic speed. The latest Java update didn't really help much. I was hoping it would be fixed that update, or that the LibreOffice folks would find a solutionOn 07/27/2011 07:03 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote:Le 27/07/11 10:16, Tom Cloyd a écrit : Hi Tom,Just to move the record pointer from the first to the last record takes almost exactly 20 seconds. To do a search of the beginning of the main text field for a 6 character string that isn't there (i.e., the engine searches to the very end of the table) takes 2 minutes and 5 seconds. You can imagine how long it takes to locate and update 10 records. This is the worst performance I've ever seen in a database, period.Unfortunately, you are not the first, and no doubt the last either, to report performance issues using the Base with integrated hsqldb. The problem is not hsqldb, which actually on its own performs quite well, but the manner in which Base loads everything into memory to be able to work. You could try issuing a SHUTDOWN COMPACT command from the Tools> SQLdialog, then saving and closing your ODB file before re-opening it again.Alex
-- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+help@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted