Re: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Hi Bruce, From my conversation with Jonathan: >> Saving a large stack can be time consuming - especially across a network. One alternative is a client-server setup. The entire stack is in RAM on the server side; but client stacks only deal with one record at a time. Thus the stack is always saved

Re: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

> Jonathan, > >> Maybe for Rev 3.0 they will work out such a thing > > If they don't, I have--if you're ready to go client/serer. Well, that sounds like the right approach. Brief summary? ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kurt Kaufman Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 6:24 PM To: use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Subject: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets "...In that case you could copy the file onto your HD temporarily, edit and then copy it back to the s

Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

"...In that case you could copy the file onto your HD temporarily, edit and then copy it back to the server..." Would something like this work? There would be two versions of the splash-stack, one for User-A, and another for User-B, C, etc. User-A opens splash-stack and data-stack.

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Jonathan, Maybe for Rev 3.0 they will work out such a thing If they don't, I have--if you're ready to go client/serer. Rob Cozens, Staff Conservator Mendonoma Marine Life Conservancy "Thirty years ago, our fisheries seemed inexhaustible. Today we know they are not. The fault lies in large measur

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Why not just use a SQL database to store the data and use Rev to gather and display your data? This will give you the best performance and flexibility. sqb Thanks Frank, That sounds most practical. For my purpose, I could have it save a separate stack for every month's worth of articles. I will

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Major Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 12:48 PM To: How to use Revolution Subject: Re: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets Hi Jonathan, > I guess huge is relative to the speed of one's system and network. The > stack I am dealing with is only 4.74mb - yet, it still takes

Re: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Hi Jonathan, I guess huge is relative to the speed of one's system and network. The stack I am dealing with is only 4.74mb - yet, it still takes a couple minutes to save across the network. That's no big deal - but a year from now the same stack will be 20meg, and will take 8 minutes to save. I am

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Maybe for Rev 3.0 they will work out such a thing. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Cozens Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 12:30 PM To: How to use Revolution Subject: RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets How hug

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

How huge is "huge", Jonathan? If it were possible to use a single stack as a huge database, it would be very convenient. I've worked with 43K-record, 43MB, database stacks in SDB. Rob Cozens "We are living on a dying planet. We're killing everything that's alive

Re: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Hi All, Saving a large stack can be time consuming - especially across a network. One alternative is a client-server setup. The entire stack is in RAM on the server side; but client stacks only deal with one record at a time. Thus the stack is always saved locally at the server, never over the ne

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Thanks MisterX, It sounds like you have really thought this through. Much food for thought. I will have to do some mental digesting before I decide for sure which way I want to go. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://li

Re: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Hi Jonathan, On Jan 26, 2005, at 11:01, Lynch, Jonathan wrote: Still - how do database programs do it? Is each record a separate file or something? If it were possible to use a single stack as a huge database, it would be very convenient. The big problem of course is that opening a stack loads the

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Thanks Frank, That sounds most practical. For my purpose, I could have it save a separate stack for every month's worth of articles. I will do that. Still - how do database programs do it? Is each record a separate file or something? If it were possible to use a single stack as a huge database,

RE: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

a clean stack! revgourl "http://google.com " type "la bresse webcam" send "mouseup" to button "im feeling lucky" sorry for the lengt, i had to get it out! Hope it helps nonetheless Xavier -- monsieurx.com - So what? Im having fun! > -Original

Re: Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 You might do best to split the data onto separate stacks and save them independently. When the data is needed, you can retrieve it from the appropriate stack; when you change it, you copy it back to the data stack it belongs in and, at an appropriat

Using stacks as a database for very large data sets

Saving a large stack can be time consuming - especially across a network. Would it be possible to have some sort of write-to-file scheme that just changes the stored data for single card, but not the entire stack? ___ use-revolution mailing list use-r