On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Dave Crozier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jean, > Over the past 2 years we haven't had a single index or database corruption > even though our tables are around the 1.5Gb individual size with indexes > that range from 100 to 700Mb with about 130 users working 24/7. > > Prior to this time of stability we had VFP 9 without SP1 and more > importantly cheap Gigabit or 100Mb network cards. Changing the cards to good > 3Com versions solved the index/data corruption virtually overnight and the > addition of SP1 made the whole system more stable. I forget the last time a > C5 error appeared. > > As a matter of course I do a complete reindex every other stock take which > occurs bi-monthly and takes about 15 minutes. > > Your error is more likely than not related to hardware not software and be > sure to have ALL the cache options turned off on the server. > > As for your rewrite in VB, well if the system barfs with VFP then it will > surely do the same with VB. Client server is obviously an option (as you are > aware) but VFP is an ideal candidate for this without a complete rewrite, > surely. --------------------------------
I have to disagree with that last statement. As you point out this is probably a hardware problem on the NIC level. Converting to a C/S environment would fix the the initial issue. Cost wise it is a no brainer to fix the nics. hahahaha. > I am in the process of a conversion from real VFP tables onto SQL 2K5 at the > moment and although it is not simple, it's a great deal easier than a > complete rewrite. Comparative testing with C# reveals little performance > increase but I must admit that I do like the "Eye Candy" you can add to c# > programs with all the 3rd party components that are available. The main > reason for the upgrade being the requirement for remote VPN access as well > as web access eventually. Also, the question of data security from prying > eyes is a lot easier with Client/Server, as is real time data backup. ----------------------------- I am sure that the conversion to a different backend in the end is almost a full rewrite, say 75% of the entire beast? Where if that time was spent in the port as well it would be time well spent. As you stated you get multi platform web/win as well as the ability to keep your look or visual style contemporary. > > >From now on, specific programs that require options such as scheduling etc. > will be in C# but the majority of the desktop apps will remain in VFP. > > I'm not a dinosaur here and accept that .Net (C#) is extremely good at some > things and I really can't be bothered spending the time putting in kludgy > fixes to make VFP look good - this is where I will use .NET. > > One thing is for sure, if you do a rewrite then you will start to find all > the shortcomings of VB compared with VFP and C# and my advice would be go > the C# route. > > C# Pro's: > 1. The IDE - excellent with the "Resharper" 3rd party addon being a must > 2. Speed - well impressive > 3. Intellisense - much better than VFP > 4. Added 3rd party add-ons. Why re-invent the wheel > 5. Application/Program distribution - really easy > 6. The ability to develop PDA applications > 7. Availability of lots of learning resources - thank God! > 8. Good fun once you get up to speed > > C# Cons: > 1. No "with....endwith" construction > 2. The .NET base library of functions is just impossible to learn > 3. Learning curve, not for the language basics but for .NET > 4. Quirky C# syntax > 5. Data Binding - this is the fault of .NET not C# but is long winded > compared with VFP > 6. Just when you think you've got there another revision of the language > comes out or a feature such as Linq makes an appearance - DOH! At least VFP > is now a stationary target. > 7. I use predominantly VS2K5 and a little VS2K8 but that is now about to be > superceded, so keeping up with the "latest and greatest" becomes a pain. ---------------------------------- My hardest part was the brain thinking/typing in the wrong syntax. The databinding was not that tough. I wanted to get out of the automatic bind back. I wanted to pass the data/object/dataset back to my DAL class to do do all of that for me. What I found as the BEST aspect for conversion was the ability to combine projects in a solution. My DAL, data access layer, was written for connectivity with SQL Server. I did one for VFP for a one time use. I can add that DAL project to any new solution (app) I need in the future. This isn't a copy paste, just a reuse. Not I take that to the extreme, in that I have projects for web services WCF, another for the contracts that I expose, and another project for the middle layer. On top of all them thar projects I need one for testing this app and the GUI(s) associated with the app. Yes I can have a Web front end, WinForm, WPF and Silverlight as in they are all additional projects. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Mimeo.com Memphis TN 901.246-0159 _______________________________________________ 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.
