Future request

Discussions about Diving Log 6.0 - questions and hints
Post Reply
ehelm
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:42
Location: Norway
Contact:

Future request

Post by ehelm »

Will it be possible in the future to install the Dive database on a MS SQL server instead for a MS Access database?

This would be really nice..... :)
divinglog
Site Admin
Posts: 5223
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 21:02
Location: Coburg
Contact:

Post by divinglog »

I'm not sure if this would be a good idea. Here are some people who prefer the Access format, because they can edit the data more easily direct in the database. Also you can write small macros for individual imports and the required runtime files are a lot smaller than the heavy MS SQL Server. What advantages do you see with the SQL Server?
ehelm
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:42
Location: Norway
Contact:

Post by ehelm »

Hi,
Well ..as many homes are getting more advanced networks. One centralized database would be nice. But I was just thinking of the option to install .... not instead of. Sorry if you misunderstood me. The advantages are many but I guess it is a matter of what one is use too….
:)

But I see what you meen....I was just woundering, thanks for the reply. :wink:
divinglog
Site Admin
Posts: 5223
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 21:02
Location: Coburg
Contact:

Post by divinglog »

Maybe it will be possible in version 5.0 to switch the DB engine, but I can't promise it. Maybe it is too difficult to support both databases in one program, but maybe not. :)
reefhound
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 01:10

Not just no but hell no

Post by reefhound »

I abandoned Scubase, a very fine program, because it went to MSSQL and rendered all my custom macros useless. MSSQL is blatant overkill for a personal dive log, chews up system resources, makes it harder to debug problems, makes it harder (not impossible) to work with programatically, and is not as portable. I like being able to copy the mdb file to a usb jump drive and be able to access the data anywhere. I like being able to access my data without DL. Besides, I made Sven promise to maintain it in Access format before I bought my copy. :P

MSSQL is fine if you are running an enterprise database server but for a small personal database it's like trying to use your car engine to run your lawnmower.

I understand that more homes are using networks but I'm not understanding why a diving log would be accessed so frequently by so many users that you couldn't just put the mdb in a central location and have client installations of DL point to it.
Johnnt
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:15
Location: Ashurst Wood UK

Post by Johnnt »

I discounted Scubase for that very reason. I use SQL server and Oracle on daily basis at work and find them both great in the enterprise, but for a single user application they are as reefhoud said overkill.
ehelm
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:42
Location: Norway
Contact:

Post by ehelm »

It really depends on how you want to use MS SQL. Many ISP are offering MS SQL services. Also MS has SQL express Edition that is for local PC. You don't have to go for the Enterprise Ed. :?

So this is not an overkill but will give more flexablity for those who like that.

this in my optionon is a bad comperision.
"small personal database it's like trying to use your car engine to run your lawnmower. "
CompuDude
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 00:40

Post by CompuDude »

divinglog wrote:Maybe it will be possible in version 5.0 to switch the DB engine, but I can't promise it. Maybe it is too difficult to support both databases in one program, but maybe not. :)
May I be so bold as to suggest an open source db format, rather than MS SQL or Access, should you choose to go that route? That would enable other platforms an easier time, should you ever consider porting the app, and everything would be much better documented as well.
reefhound
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 01:10

Post by reefhound »

CompuDude wrote:May I be so bold as to suggest an open source db format, rather than MS SQL or Access, should you choose to go that route? That would enable other platforms an easier time, should you ever consider porting the app, and everything would be much better documented as well.
I could be happy with that, since my whole point is to be able to access the data independently and easily, which open source would be even better at than Access.
divinglog
Site Admin
Posts: 5223
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 21:02
Location: Coburg
Contact:

Post by divinglog »

At the moment I want to stay with the Access format as long as possible, because its easy to use, has a small runtime and is very fail safe. The most problems with Scubase refer to problems of SQL Server and not Scubase itself. The server is not running properly, especially on Vista there are permission problems and such things. Most users don't want to configure complicated server settings and install big setups slowing down their system. They want a logbook application and move their logbook file as they would move a Word document.

I understand that some users have already a MS SQL Server or MySQL Server running, but this doesn't apply to the majority. I'll should take a look on SQL Lite which is used in Firefox 3, maybe this is an open source alternate to Access. But this is only in the long view. In the meantime I think several export functions to open source formats like UDCF, UDDF and MySQL are the best way to make sure the data will be accessible in future.
Post Reply