On Dec 14, 2011, at 8:02 PM, Ken Dibble wrote:
> "Valentina does not require the creation of KEY fields - you can avoid the
> headache of filling in unique values.
>
> Each Valentina Table has a special RecID field, which provides a unique
> number for a record of this table."
[snip]
> Okay, yeah, but nothing is free.
>
> SOME space SOMEWHERE on the disk is being used to store those invisible
> RecID values.
Funny, I had this exact same argument with Ruslan when I was using
Valentina. My point was that Valentina tables simply had an autoincrement
column that was automatically added, and which you couldn't get rid of if you
wanted. His point was since they were offsets and not actual stored values,
they were more efficient. Valentina records are fixed length, so to get
RecID=99 the software only has to jump to the start of the file + (99 * rec
length).
> And, what special hoops do I have to jump through in my code during data
> entry so that Valentina knows WHICH phone goes with WHICH person?
You create links between tables, and these are essentially triggers
that establish the relationship. Those *are* stored independently, but you have
no control over them.
Valentina is actually a pretty cool tool, but IMO there are better
options out there, both in terms of capabilities, size, speed and openness.
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
