php-windows Digest 26 Jan 2002 00:44:13 -0000 Issue 970
Topics (messages 11637 through 11651):
Re: [binarycloud-dev] Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: [metabase-dev] RE: [PEAR-DEV] New Metabase
Aniversary release
11637 by: Stig S. Bakken
11649 by: Alex Black
Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: [binarycloud-dev] Re: [PEAR-DEV] Re: [metabase-dev] RE: [PEAR-DEV]
New Metabase Aniversary release
11638 by: Stig S. Bakken
11640 by: Björn Schotte
11650 by: Manuel Lemos
Re: Need Advice
11639 by: Ross Fleming
11641 by: Svensson, B.A.T. (HKG)
11648 by: LaserJetter
11651 by: Ross Fleming
Re: Include()
11642 by: Ignatius Teo
Re: Limit connection/download
11643 by: Nicole Amashta
11645 by: Olivier Hubert
11646 by: Nicole Amashta
Re: Windows NT SMTP Set Up Help Needed
11644 by: Charlie Killian
Re: load data infile problem
11647 by: Nicole Amashta
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 22:17, Alex Black wrote:
> > Template classes are also foundation components of modern
> > applications.
>
> They are certainly important, but they do not prevent interoperability in
> the same way that different database abstraction packages do.
>
> >> application, using APIs that are slightly different is a bad thing.
> >
> > Of course, but no one forces you to do that. I, as a developer,
> > can choose if I want to use PEAR::Metabase in my application
> > or PEAR::DB.
>
> Yes, which is not a good idea. If you're tying to get people to use a common
> set of high quality classes, you'll need to introduce some standards.
>
> > Remember, PEAR ist not Midgard. PEAR is no application framework.
> > It's a pool of classes that follow coding standards.
>
> As the project leader of binarycloud, which is an application framework that
> uses some limited amount of PEAR code, I am obviously aware of the
> difference. I have no interest in PEAR as an application framework, I like
> it as it is: pool of classes that follow coding standards.
>
> It has been repeated over, and over, and over again that PEAR is not CPAN.
> If PEAR will allow multiple versions of a foundation component like database
> abstraction, then PEAR certainly is CPAN, with coding standards added.
>
> CPAN is huge and tangled because its owners did not want to make decisions.
> PEAR can be that as well, though given the extremely limited CVS access to
> the repository it doesn't strike me as a CPAN clone, it strikes me as a
> concerted effort to come up with a set of base classes for common needs in
> the development community. Thus my argument for one abstraction layer. if
> you guys are building CPAN with coding standards, great, but say so. I and
> no doubt others will finally shut up about this question and we can all get
> on with writing code and designing stuff that works.
>
> This points to the age-old problem with PEAR: no one can decide what it
> actually is, so this argument comes up in different forms about once every
> three months.
>
> Just decide: is PEAR:
> -CPAN with coding standards
> -PHP Base Classes
>
> That's a big difference.
I'm currently writing "The PEAR Manifest", a document that clearly
defines PEAR once and for all. I'll post the first draft on pear-dev
here when it's done, but to answer your question, there has been talk
about a "core" set of packages for a while. In the manifest these are
called PFC (PHP Foundation Classes), although it will not say which
packages the PFC includes. The manifest also covers PECL, and how PEAR
relates to applications and frameworks.
- Stig
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I'm currently writing "The PEAR Manifest", a document that clearly
> defines PEAR once and for all. I'll post the first draft on pear-dev
> here when it's done, but to answer your question, there has been talk
> about a "core" set of packages for a while. In the manifest these are
> called PFC (PHP Foundation Classes), although it will not say which
> packages the PFC includes. The manifest also covers PECL, and how PEAR
> relates to applications and frameworks.
Fantastic.
This is all great news and I really do look forward to working with you so
we don't duplicate efforts. It's great to hear that you're going to "define"
PEAR once and for all.
best,
_alex
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 22:24, Björn Schotte wrote:
> * Alex Black wrote:
> > > Of course, but no one forces you to do that. I, as a developer,
> > > can choose if I want to use PEAR::Metabase in my application
> > > or PEAR::DB.
> > Yes, which is not a good idea. If you're tying to get people to use a common
> > set of high quality classes, you'll need to introduce some standards.
>
> But furthermore you need to assure that you don't influence
> people too much while promoting PEAR as the new solution on
> PHP's heaven.
>
> > difference. I have no interest in PEAR as an application framework, I like
> > it as it is: pool of classes that follow coding standards.
>
> Yep.
>
> > If PEAR will allow multiple versions of a foundation component like database
> > abstraction, then PEAR certainly is CPAN, with coding standards added.
>
> I really don't think so. If it would be, I can't see any
> disadvantages. Why should PEAR people force the developers
> to use "the one and only" DB abstraction class?
Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything, but the fact is that if you
want to make components that deal with databases, you need to support
one or more database APIs. Most people will feel that supporting
several database abstraction layers is a waste of time, so we wish to
provide _one_ API that all PEAR components can leverage. If we are too
chicken to make this decision, we can't make interoperable components.
Now we've even decided to merge PEAR DB and Metabase, and today it seems
most people are tired of having multiple database layers, and welcome
this effort. I don't understand why this is an issue for you, could you
explain?
- Stig
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
* Stig S. Bakken wrote:
> this effort. I don't understand why this is an issue for you, could you
> explain?
I already explained it several times.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,
Björn Schotte wrote:
>
> * Stig S. Bakken wrote:
> > this effort. I don't understand why this is an issue for you, could you
> > explain?
>
> I already explained it several times.
I understand your concern of this PEAR-DB x Metabase merger may open a
precedent that will motivate others to come along with their components
and propose mergers with other PEAR-DB components.
I think that is a good precedent because it will let PEAR components
implementations evolve, of course by keeping backwards compatibility to
not break the applications of people that rely on the current
implementation of PEAR components.
Of course, like with PEAR-DB x Metabase, no component merger should
happen if the interested parties do not agree with the terms of merger.
If a favourable decision is made, it should be because the agreed merger
terms were beneficial to the interested parties.
Here interested parties means, the proposing authors and some PEAR
representatives preferrably elected in a democratic process to evaluate
proposals and make decisions regarding them. Currently there is nobody
elected as PEAR representative but if I got it right it should happen
some time soon.
Regards,
Manuel Lemos
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The answer to this question is the same as the answer to the question
that is "Why is the Internet so slow?"
Your 765Kb/s is probably the fastest part in the link, and your
connection is only as fast as the slowest part of the chain. tracert to
find out where it is but there is probably not a lot you can do about
it. Incidently, your 765Kb/s is very likely shared with the rest of
your street. And also it's probably 765kilobits/second, where as most
windows programs quote transfer streams in kilobytes/second. So
comparatively your 15kbytes/s is 120kbits/s, which is about a sixth of
your bandwidth. Try multiple uploads, and if you can sustain, say 5
uploads of 15kb/s, then the problem is the one I stated above. If the
sum of the uploads is 15kb/s, then talk to your line provider and shout
about it.
Hope that helps
Ross
Mike wrote:
>
> Ok, I have looked for the past 2 days searching for an answer to my problem.
> It's not PHP related but quite similar to it.
>
> I run a web/FTP server from my house. My problem is that my download rates
> to my place is super fast yet my u/l rates really suck. I mean I can't push
> anything faster then 15 kb/s and I am on a 1.5 MB connection with a 765KBs
> up stream. Whats going on? i have tried 2 nics and that don't seem to be the
> problem. That and the other computers that are on same network that i'm on
> are lagged to crap. Its been happening for 4 months now and it is really
> making me mad.
> Any ideas?? here are the specs:
>
> AMD 1.4 GHz
> 512MB PC-133 RAM
> D-Link 530+TX 10/100
> SMC 10
>
> Is there something in the registry that i can change? Maybe its a registry
> setting for an up down ratio?
>
> --
> -Mike Taekema
> Microsoft Certified Professional
> www.fvforces.net
>
> --
> PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>Is there something in the registry that i can change? Maybe
>its a registry setting for an up down ratio?
You might have a "boosted web connection", with differential bandwidth
assigned for UL and DL, check with your ISP configuration.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Are you using a ISDN type line (digital signal) or ADSL type line
(Broadband, Analogue signal)?
If you are using ADSL, then it is set up to download much faster than it can
upload as this is the usage pattern of a normal internet user.
AOL does not recommend using ADSL for running servers because of this.
ISDN is more suited to this because upload and download speeds are more or
less the same and it is designed for business use, where web hosting etc
might be used.
Out of interest, does anybody know roughly how much a leased line is in the
UK? I heard rumours that the price would drop when ADSL came out to compete
with it. If I can find a reasonable price, I would like to run my own
servers too.
LJ
"Ross Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The answer to this question is the same as the answer to the question
> that is "Why is the Internet so slow?"
>
> Your 765Kb/s is probably the fastest part in the link, and your
> connection is only as fast as the slowest part of the chain. tracert to
> find out where it is but there is probably not a lot you can do about
> it. Incidently, your 765Kb/s is very likely shared with the rest of
> your street. And also it's probably 765kilobits/second, where as most
> windows programs quote transfer streams in kilobytes/second. So
> comparatively your 15kbytes/s is 120kbits/s, which is about a sixth of
> your bandwidth. Try multiple uploads, and if you can sustain, say 5
> uploads of 15kb/s, then the problem is the one I stated above. If the
> sum of the uploads is 15kb/s, then talk to your line provider and shout
> about it.
>
> Hope that helps
>
> Ross
>
> Mike wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I have looked for the past 2 days searching for an answer to my
problem.
> > It's not PHP related but quite similar to it.
> >
> > I run a web/FTP server from my house. My problem is that my download
rates
> > to my place is super fast yet my u/l rates really suck. I mean I can't
push
> > anything faster then 15 kb/s and I am on a 1.5 MB connection with a
765KBs
> > up stream. Whats going on? i have tried 2 nics and that don't seem to be
the
> > problem. That and the other computers that are on same network that i'm
on
> > are lagged to crap. Its been happening for 4 months now and it is really
> > making me mad.
> > Any ideas?? here are the specs:
> >
> > AMD 1.4 GHz
> > 512MB PC-133 RAM
> > D-Link 530+TX 10/100
> > SMC 10
> >
> > Is there something in the registry that i can change? Maybe its a
registry
> > setting for an up down ratio?
> >
> > --
> > -Mike Taekema
> > Microsoft Certified Professional
> > www.fvforces.net
> >
> > --
> > PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The problem is not the ADSL problem. He explains he is on a 1.5meg download
and a 765K upload. The problem is that he can't upload at the speed his
line
is quoted at. I still say that it is most likely that the slowest link in
the
chain is 15K and is slowing it down. 15K is still bloody fast, considering
modems upload at 4.5K tops.
He should be complaining to his provider, his lawyer, and his priest. In
that
order...
Incidently, I highly doubt (x)DSL will be competing with leased line
solutions,
given that they are completely dependant on (a) distance to the exchange,
(b) the number of people using DSL on the same exchange, and (c) like you
say,
ADSL is not recommended for business users due to the lack of support for
running servers. Expect to pay at LEAST £100/month for a leased line, and
that doesn't even begin to consider the installation fees...
Just my two cents.
Regards
Ross
PS Oh and don't get me started on AOhell!! The bloody program has only just
crashed again. No wonder AOL don't recommend it as a business solution...
-----Original Message-----
From: LaserJetter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 25 January 2002 19:07
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP-WIN] Need Advice
Are you using a ISDN type line (digital signal) or ADSL type line
(Broadband, Analogue signal)?
If you are using ADSL, then it is set up to download much faster than it can
upload as this is the usage pattern of a normal internet user.
AOL does not recommend using ADSL for running servers because of this.
ISDN is more suited to this because upload and download speeds are more or
less the same and it is designed for business use, where web hosting etc
might be used.
Out of interest, does anybody know roughly how much a leased line is in the
UK? I heard rumours that the price would drop when ADSL came out to compete
with it. If I can find a reasonable price, I would like to run my own
servers too.
LJ
"Ross Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The answer to this question is the same as the answer to the question
> that is "Why is the Internet so slow?"
>
> Your 765Kb/s is probably the fastest part in the link, and your
> connection is only as fast as the slowest part of the chain. tracert to
> find out where it is but there is probably not a lot you can do about
> it. Incidently, your 765Kb/s is very likely shared with the rest of
> your street. And also it's probably 765kilobits/second, where as most
> windows programs quote transfer streams in kilobytes/second. So
> comparatively your 15kbytes/s is 120kbits/s, which is about a sixth of
> your bandwidth. Try multiple uploads, and if you can sustain, say 5
> uploads of 15kb/s, then the problem is the one I stated above. If the
> sum of the uploads is 15kb/s, then talk to your line provider and shout
> about it.
>
> Hope that helps
>
> Ross
>
> Mike wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I have looked for the past 2 days searching for an answer to my
problem.
> > It's not PHP related but quite similar to it.
> >
> > I run a web/FTP server from my house. My problem is that my download
rates
> > to my place is super fast yet my u/l rates really suck. I mean I can't
push
> > anything faster then 15 kb/s and I am on a 1.5 MB connection with a
765KBs
> > up stream. Whats going on? i have tried 2 nics and that don't seem to be
the
> > problem. That and the other computers that are on same network that i'm
on
> > are lagged to crap. Its been happening for 4 months now and it is really
> > making me mad.
> > Any ideas?? here are the specs:
> >
> > AMD 1.4 GHz
> > 512MB PC-133 RAM
> > D-Link 530+TX 10/100
> > SMC 10
> >
> > Is there something in the registry that i can change? Maybe its a
registry
> > setting for an up down ratio?
> >
> > --
> > -Mike Taekema
> > Microsoft Certified Professional
> > www.fvforces.net
> >
> > --
> > PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Have u tried using "soap"....
tee hee hee (sorry...couldn't resist!)
Ignatius
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shrock, Court" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 7:13 AM
Subject: RE: [PHP-WIN] Include()
> hmmmm....web services.....I am curious about an alternative to .Net and
Sun
> for web services.....anybody?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: alain samoun [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 11:48 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [PHP-WIN] Include()
>
>
> Ross:
> No, it's not what I mean :)
> Let say that you have a PHP class that I like on your site, for free or a
> bundle of pounds, you give me permission to use this class from my site to
> your site (include it on my site) without even giving me your source.
> Anyway, I know there are other ways to do that...
> A+
> Alain
>
> --
> PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If they are registed, this means they must login, which you may then be
using database for this. Add a new field, totaldownloads, and update that
field for each download. You know who it is because they logged in. Each
time the user logs in with that name, you always know their download count.
good luck,
nicole amashta
www.aeontrek.com
========================
"Olivier Hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> At 20:57 2002-01-24 +0000, Symeon Charalabides wrote:
> > > I have a web site with a lot of files that are downloadable only by
> > > registered users. Session variables are used to keep track of who is
> > logged and
> > > who is not (non-registered users can still browse the files, but not
> > download
> > > them). Now, I would like to have a limit of one download/user. Is
there
> > a way I
> > > can limit the downloads with PHP or even an Apache configuration?
> >
> >The simplest way is to set a flag via a cookie - very easy with PHP.
> >Something
> >along the lines of:
> >
> >if (DOWNLOAD)
> > setcookie('has_downloaded','1',time()+60*60*24*(number of
days),'\');
> >
> >However, knowledgable people can see through the cookies system and
delete
> >the cookie from their PC, allowing them to download more.
> >As I said, it's only the simplest system...
>
> This is a good idea, but then again, how do I know for sure when
a
> user has finished his download and can download another file? With
> something like this (which I could enable in a session variable), a user
> can only download one file before being rejected by the system.
>
> Olivier Hubert
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, I can know how many files users have downloaded, I already log this
and allow them to be ranked by the number of downloads. However, I want to
restrict downloads so that a given user can only download one file at a
time. My problem is that I don't know how to monitor the downloads so that
I can identify for sure when a user has finished a download or not.
Thanks for the help :-)
Olivier Hubert
At 11:25 2002-01-25 -0500, Nicole Amashta wrote:
>If they are registed, this means they must login, which you may then be
>using database for this. Add a new field, totaldownloads, and update that
>field for each download. You know who it is because they logged in. Each
>time the user logs in with that name, you always know their download count.
>
>good luck,
>nicole amashta
>www.aeontrek.com
>
>========================
>"Olivier Hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > At 20:57 2002-01-24 +0000, Symeon Charalabides wrote:
> > > > I have a web site with a lot of files that are downloadable only by
> > > > registered users. Session variables are used to keep track of who is
> > > logged and
> > > > who is not (non-registered users can still browse the files, but not
> > > download
> > > > them). Now, I would like to have a limit of one download/user. Is
>there
> > > a way I
> > > > can limit the downloads with PHP or even an Apache configuration?
> > >
> > >The simplest way is to set a flag via a cookie - very easy with PHP.
> > >Something
> > >along the lines of:
> > >
> > >if (DOWNLOAD)
> > > setcookie('has_downloaded','1',time()+60*60*24*(number of
>days),'\');
> > >
> > >However, knowledgable people can see through the cookies system and
>delete
> > >the cookie from their PC, allowing them to download more.
> > >As I said, it's only the simplest system...
> >
> > This is a good idea, but then again, how do I know for sure when
>a
> > user has finished his download and can download another file? With
> > something like this (which I could enable in a session variable), a user
> > can only download one file before being rejected by the system.
> >
> > Olivier Hubert
> >
>
>
>
>--
>PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
ah, true. good one; so if a download failed, then they'd lose one and you
wouldn't know. I see.
Well .. if _what_ they are downloading can also be recorded in the
database, then allow them access to download that same thing however many
times they want. So if it should fail or succeed, it wouldn't matter. This
is an option, maybe? That is, if the user is restricted to ONE download,
then they select the one they want and are limited to that one from then on.
... just an option ... probably not exactly what you want ... especially if
you want to allow 2+ downloads ...
good luck!
nicole
www.aeontrek.com
"Olivier Hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Yes, I can know how many files users have downloaded, I already log this
> and allow them to be ranked by the number of downloads. However, I want to
> restrict downloads so that a given user can only download one file at a
> time. My problem is that I don't know how to monitor the downloads so that
> I can identify for sure when a user has finished a download or not.
>
> Thanks for the help :-)
> Olivier Hubert
>
> At 11:25 2002-01-25 -0500, Nicole Amashta wrote:
> >If they are registed, this means they must login, which you may then be
> >using database for this. Add a new field, totaldownloads, and update that
> >field for each download. You know who it is because they logged in. Each
> >time the user logs in with that name, you always know their download
count.
> >
> >good luck,
> >nicole amashta
> >www.aeontrek.com
> >
> >========================
> >"Olivier Hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > At 20:57 2002-01-24 +0000, Symeon Charalabides wrote:
> > > > > I have a web site with a lot of files that are downloadable only
by
> > > > > registered users. Session variables are used to keep track of who
is
> > > > logged and
> > > > > who is not (non-registered users can still browse the files, but
not
> > > > download
> > > > > them). Now, I would like to have a limit of one download/user. Is
> >there
> > > > a way I
> > > > > can limit the downloads with PHP or even an Apache configuration?
> > > >
> > > >The simplest way is to set a flag via a cookie - very easy with PHP.
> > > >Something
> > > >along the lines of:
> > > >
> > > >if (DOWNLOAD)
> > > > setcookie('has_downloaded','1',time()+60*60*24*(number of
> >days),'\');
> > > >
> > > >However, knowledgable people can see through the cookies system and
> >delete
> > > >the cookie from their PC, allowing them to download more.
> > > >As I said, it's only the simplest system...
> > >
> > > This is a good idea, but then again, how do I know for sure
when
> >a
> > > user has finished his download and can download another file? With
> > > something like this (which I could enable in a session variable), a
user
> > > can only download one file before being rejected by the system.
> > >
> > > Olivier Hubert
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Martin-
Separating the parameters from the function call didn't work. I think the
problem is with the WindowsNT SMTP server.
How should the WindowsNT SMTP server be set up to make mail() work?
Charlie
> Could you try this out:
>
> $address = "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
> $head = "From: PHP Test <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>\r\n";
> $subject = "hello world";
> $message = "Hello there\nTest123\n";
> mail($address, $subject, $message, $head);
>
> I think the mail header is required, anyway this works for me and i
> suggested it to a guy here yesterday that had similar probs and it worked
> right out for him too
>
> /Martin
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Assuming the file is in parsable format, such as csv, you can just read
through the file, form insert statements, and insert the data this way.
Example:
you file: cats.txt
===============================
"name","color","gender","age"
"Sly","black and white", "male", 2
"Tiger","orange","male",2
"Chloe","white","female",1
===============================
you can read through that file, parse it row by row, field by field, and
create insert statements like so and insert the data on the fly ...
nicole
www.aeontrek.com
"Rop30999" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have a called file cats.txt which count data that were solitary of a DB
> Access.
> I need to export these data for a table 'cats' inside of a DB done in
MySql.
>
> In MySql I can execute this procedure in the following way:
>
> Load data local infile "gatos.txt"
> into table gatos
> fields
> terminated by ','
> enclosed by '"'
> (Id, Nome, Raça);
>
> I need to know how I can accomplish this same operation but using PHP
>
> Thank you
>
> Paulo
>
>
--- End Message ---
